Literature DB >> 6242408

How normal and retarded individuals monitor and regulate speed and accuracy of responding in serial choice tasks.

N Brewer, G A Smith.   

Abstract

These experiments investigate whether or not differences in the way that retarded and nonretarded individuals monitor and regulate speed and accuracy of responding contribute to the slower and more variable performance of retarded subjects on choice reaction time (RT) tasks. Rabbitt (1979, 1981) suggested that efficient choice RT performance is mediated by subjects tracking increasingly faster RT bands on successive trials until, by making and recognizing errors, they discover those very fast RT levels that should be avoided and those safe bands, just above typical error levels, that should be tracked. Experiments 1A and 1B established that most retarded subjects detect their errors as efficiently as nonretarded controls, a finding that excludes the possibility that retarded subjects do not monitor accuracy efficiently but achieve comparable levels of accuracy by consistently responding within very slow RT bands that minimize likelihood of errors. Experiment 2 showed that while a qualitatively similar trial-by-trial tracking mechanism mediates the performance of both groups, retarded subjects are less efficient at constraining RTs within very fast, but safe, bands. Increasing error probabilities at longer RTs suggest that momentary fluctuations in stimulus discriminability and/or attention are factors affecting RT variability in retarded subjects. The RT patterns for various sequences of correct responses initiated and terminated by errors suggest that the effective past experience (EPEX) guiding trial-by-trial RT adjustments of retarded subjects is short and inadequate, and it was argued that this can account for much of the remaining RT variability contributing to retarded-nonretarded differences. Not only does a short EPEX increase variability by giving rise to long error-free sequences of slower than average RT but also, when combined with occasional specified random fluctuations, it suggests why retarded subjects can achieve, but not sustain, RT levels maintained by nonretarded subjects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6242408     DOI: 10.1037//0096-3445.113.1.71

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  13 in total

1.  Processing speed and mental retardation: deadline procedures indicate fixed and adjustable limitations.

Authors:  N Brewer; G A Smith
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1990-09

2.  Unexpected events induce motor slowing via a brain mechanism for action-stopping with global suppressive effects.

Authors:  Jan R Wessel; Adam R Aron
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Cognitive control functions of anterior cingulate cortex in macaque monkeys performing a Wisconsin Card Sorting Test analog.

Authors:  Masaru Kuwabara; Farshad A Mansouri; Mark J Buckley; Keiji Tanaka
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Mobilizing cognition for speeded action: try-harder instructions promote motivated readiness in the constant-foreperiod paradigm.

Authors:  Michael B Steinborn; Robert Langner; Lynn Huestegge
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-09-20

5.  Perceiving goals and actions in individuals with autism spectrum disorders.

Authors:  Tiziana Zalla; Nelly Labruyère; Nicolas Georgieff
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2013-10

6.  False external feedback modulates posterror slowing and the f-P300: implications for theories of posterror adjustment.

Authors:  Blair Saunders; Ines Jentzsch
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-12

7.  Can post-error dynamics explain sequential reaction time patterns?

Authors:  Stephanie Goldfarb; Kongfatt Wong-Lin; Michael Schwemmer; Naomi Ehrich Leonard; Philip Holmes
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-07-16

8.  Restoration of Attention by Rest in a Multitasking World: Theory, Methodology, and Empirical Evidence.

Authors:  Frank Schumann; Michael B Steinborn; Jens Kürten; Liyu Cao; Barbara Friederike Händel; Lynn Huestegge
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-04-01

9.  Context specificity of post-error and post-conflict cognitive control adjustments.

Authors:  Sarah E Forster; Raymond Y Cho
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Strategy Changes After Errors Improve Performance.

Authors:  Liesbet Van der Borght; Charlotte Desmet; Wim Notebaert
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-01-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.