Learning about causal relations that change over time: primacy and recency over long timeframes in causal judgments and memory.

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Benjamin M Rottman, Yiwen Zhang
{"title":"Learning about causal relations that change over time: primacy and recency over long timeframes in causal judgments and memory.","authors":"Benjamin M Rottman, Yiwen Zhang","doi":"10.1186/s41235-025-00614-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Being able to notice that a cause-effect relation is getting stronger or weaker is important for adapting to one's environment and deciding how to use the cause in the future. We conducted an experiment in which participants learned about a cause-effect relation that either got stronger or weaker over time. The experiment was conducted with a typical procedure in which the learning cases were presented rapidly, and with a mobile phone procedure, in which participants experienced the cause-effect relation over 24 days. First, we found that people could detect the change in contingency. They were better at doing so in the artificial short timeframe task, but still could do so in the more realistic long timeframe task. Second, when making summary judgments about the cause-effect relation, participants exhibited a recency effect for most measures in the long timeframe, but did not exhibit a primacy or recency effect in the short timeframe. Third, though participants' episodic memories for individual cause-effect events in the learning sequence were quite poor, they did exhibit primacy and recency effects in the short timeframe; these were attenuated in the long timeframe. These findings raise fundamental questions about causal learning; they suggest that people automatically recognize changes and store representations of the contingency during different phases of learning, but this ability is not predicted by most existing theories of causal learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"10 1","pages":"9"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11845336/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-025-00614-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Being able to notice that a cause-effect relation is getting stronger or weaker is important for adapting to one's environment and deciding how to use the cause in the future. We conducted an experiment in which participants learned about a cause-effect relation that either got stronger or weaker over time. The experiment was conducted with a typical procedure in which the learning cases were presented rapidly, and with a mobile phone procedure, in which participants experienced the cause-effect relation over 24 days. First, we found that people could detect the change in contingency. They were better at doing so in the artificial short timeframe task, but still could do so in the more realistic long timeframe task. Second, when making summary judgments about the cause-effect relation, participants exhibited a recency effect for most measures in the long timeframe, but did not exhibit a primacy or recency effect in the short timeframe. Third, though participants' episodic memories for individual cause-effect events in the learning sequence were quite poor, they did exhibit primacy and recency effects in the short timeframe; these were attenuated in the long timeframe. These findings raise fundamental questions about causal learning; they suggest that people automatically recognize changes and store representations of the contingency during different phases of learning, but this ability is not predicted by most existing theories of causal learning.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.30%
发文量
96
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信