Identifying similarity- and rule-based processes in quantitative judgments: A multi-method approach combining cognitive modeling and eye tracking.

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Florian I Seitz, Rebecca Albrecht, Bettina von Helversen, Jörg Rieskamp, Agnes Rosner
{"title":"Identifying similarity- and rule-based processes in quantitative judgments: A multi-method approach combining cognitive modeling and eye tracking.","authors":"Florian I Seitz, Rebecca Albrecht, Bettina von Helversen, Jörg Rieskamp, Agnes Rosner","doi":"10.3758/s13423-024-02624-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quantitative judgments have been suggested to result from a mixture of similarity- and rule-based processing. People can judge an object's criterion value based on the object's similarity to previously experienced exemplars and based on a rule that integrates the object's cues like a linear regression. In order to better understand these processes, the present work combines cognitive modeling and eye tracking and tests whether people who rely more on the similarity to exemplars also look more at the exemplar locations on the screen. In two eye-tracking studies, participants learned to assign each of four exemplars to a different screen corner and criterion value and then judged the criterion value of briefly presented test stimuli. Eye tracking measured participants' gazes to the now empty exemplar locations (a phenomenon called looking-at-nothing); cognitive modeling of the test phase judgments quantified participants' reliance on a similarity- over a rule-based process. Participants showed more similarity use and more looking-at-nothing in the study in which the cues were linked to the criterion by a multiplicative function than in the study with an additive cue-criterion link. Focusing on the study with a multiplicative environment, participants relying more on the similarity to exemplars also showed more looking-at-nothing ( <math><mi>τ</mi></math> = 0.25, p = .01). Within trials, looking-at-nothing was usually directed at the one exemplar that was most similar to the test stimulus. These results show that a multi-method approach combining process tracing and cognitive modeling can provide mutually supportive insights into the processes underlying higher-order cognition.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02624-y","RegionNum":3,"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

Quantitative judgments have been suggested to result from a mixture of similarity- and rule-based processing. People can judge an object's criterion value based on the object's similarity to previously experienced exemplars and based on a rule that integrates the object's cues like a linear regression. In order to better understand these processes, the present work combines cognitive modeling and eye tracking and tests whether people who rely more on the similarity to exemplars also look more at the exemplar locations on the screen. In two eye-tracking studies, participants learned to assign each of four exemplars to a different screen corner and criterion value and then judged the criterion value of briefly presented test stimuli. Eye tracking measured participants' gazes to the now empty exemplar locations (a phenomenon called looking-at-nothing); cognitive modeling of the test phase judgments quantified participants' reliance on a similarity- over a rule-based process. Participants showed more similarity use and more looking-at-nothing in the study in which the cues were linked to the criterion by a multiplicative function than in the study with an additive cue-criterion link. Focusing on the study with a multiplicative environment, participants relying more on the similarity to exemplars also showed more looking-at-nothing ( τ = 0.25, p = .01). Within trials, looking-at-nothing was usually directed at the one exemplar that was most similar to the test stimulus. These results show that a multi-method approach combining process tracing and cognitive modeling can provide mutually supportive insights into the processes underlying higher-order cognition.

识别定量判断中基于相似性和规则的过程:结合认知建模和眼动跟踪的多种方法。
定量判断被认为是基于相似性和基于规则的处理的混合结果。人们可以根据物体与之前经历过的样本的相似性,以及像线性回归一样整合物体线索的规则来判断一个物体的标准值。为了更好地理解这些过程,目前的工作将认知建模和眼动追踪结合起来,并测试那些更依赖于与范例的相似性的人是否也更关注屏幕上的范例位置。在两项眼球追踪研究中,参与者学会了给四个例子中的每一个分配不同的屏幕角落和标准值,然后判断简短呈现的测试刺激的标准值。眼动追踪测量了参与者对现在空无一物的典型位置的目光(一种被称为“看空”的现象);测试阶段判断的认知模型量化了参与者对基于规则的过程的相似性的依赖。在通过乘法函数将线索与标准联系起来的研究中,参与者比使用加性线索-标准联系的研究中的参与者表现出更多的相似性使用和更多的视而不见。在乘法环境下的研究中,更多依赖于与范例相似性的参与者也表现出更多的无所作为(τ = 0.25, p = 0.01)。在实验中,“看什么都不看”通常是针对与测试刺激最相似的一个范例。这些结果表明,将过程跟踪和认知建模相结合的多方法方法可以为高阶认知背后的过程提供相互支持的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.
×
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