后天等效范式中基于检索的推理

Troy M. Houser, Louisa Krantz, Dagmar Zeithamova
{"title":"后天等效范式中基于检索的推理","authors":"Troy M. Houser, Louisa Krantz, Dagmar Zeithamova","doi":"10.3389/fcogn.2023.1326191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Generalization is fundamental to cognition. In acquired equivalence, two stimuli that share a common association become treated as equivalent, with information acquired about one stimulus generalizing to the other. Acquired equivalence has been thought to rely on integrating related memories as they are encoded, resulting in fast spontaneous generalization, but other studies suggested effortful on-demand recombination of initially separate memories at retrieval. Here, we tested whether the tendency to separate vs. integrate related information may depend on a methodological detail of a traditional acquired equivalence paradigm.Human participants underwent feedback-based learning of overlapping face-scene associations, choosing a correct scene for a face from two options on each trial. Foil (incorrect) scenes were controlled for half of the participants to ensure that they can only learn from corrective feedback. The other half had foils selected randomly on each trial, allowing statistical learning of face-scene co-occurrence to supplement feedback-based learning. We hypothesized that the opportunity for statistical learning would boost learning and generalization and facilitate memory integration.The opportunity for statistical learning increased associative learning and generalization. However, rather than integrated memories, generalization was increased through learning during test.The results indicate that the tendency for generalization in the acquired equivalence is rather small, with no evidence for integrative encoding irrespective of group. The results inform current debates regarding encoding-based vs. retrieval-based mechanisms of generalization. They also highlight how methodological details may alter performance and the involvement of cognitive processes that underlie it.","PeriodicalId":513511,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Cognition","volume":"66 26","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retrieval-based inference in the acquired equivalence paradigm\",\"authors\":\"Troy M. Houser, Louisa Krantz, Dagmar Zeithamova\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fcogn.2023.1326191\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Generalization is fundamental to cognition. In acquired equivalence, two stimuli that share a common association become treated as equivalent, with information acquired about one stimulus generalizing to the other. Acquired equivalence has been thought to rely on integrating related memories as they are encoded, resulting in fast spontaneous generalization, but other studies suggested effortful on-demand recombination of initially separate memories at retrieval. Here, we tested whether the tendency to separate vs. integrate related information may depend on a methodological detail of a traditional acquired equivalence paradigm.Human participants underwent feedback-based learning of overlapping face-scene associations, choosing a correct scene for a face from two options on each trial. Foil (incorrect) scenes were controlled for half of the participants to ensure that they can only learn from corrective feedback. The other half had foils selected randomly on each trial, allowing statistical learning of face-scene co-occurrence to supplement feedback-based learning. We hypothesized that the opportunity for statistical learning would boost learning and generalization and facilitate memory integration.The opportunity for statistical learning increased associative learning and generalization. However, rather than integrated memories, generalization was increased through learning during test.The results indicate that the tendency for generalization in the acquired equivalence is rather small, with no evidence for integrative encoding irrespective of group. The results inform current debates regarding encoding-based vs. retrieval-based mechanisms of generalization. They also highlight how methodological details may alter performance and the involvement of cognitive processes that underlie it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":513511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Cognition\",\"volume\":\"66 26\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcogn.2023.1326191\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcogn.2023.1326191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

泛化是认知的基础。在获得性等效中,两个具有共同联想的刺激物被视为等效,从一个刺激物获得的信息会泛化到另一个刺激物。后天等价性被认为依赖于在编码时整合相关记忆,从而产生快速的自发泛化,但其他研究表明,在检索时,最初分离的记忆会按需努力重组。在这里,我们测试了分离与整合相关信息的倾向是否取决于传统习得等效范式的方法细节。人类参与者接受了基于反馈的重叠人脸-场景联想学习,在每次试验中从两个选项中为一个人脸选择一个正确的场景。为了确保参与者只能从纠正性反馈中学习,一半的参与者被控制了箔片(错误)场景。另一半参与者则在每次试验中随机选择陪衬场景,以便对人脸-场景共现的统计学习来补充基于反馈的学习。我们假设,统计学习的机会将促进学习和泛化,并促进记忆整合。结果表明,在获得的等价性中,泛化的趋势相当小,没有证据表明无论哪个组都存在整合编码。这些结果为当前关于基于编码的泛化机制与基于检索的泛化机制的争论提供了参考。这些结果还强调了方法细节可能会如何改变成绩以及作为成绩基础的认知过程的参与程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Retrieval-based inference in the acquired equivalence paradigm
Generalization is fundamental to cognition. In acquired equivalence, two stimuli that share a common association become treated as equivalent, with information acquired about one stimulus generalizing to the other. Acquired equivalence has been thought to rely on integrating related memories as they are encoded, resulting in fast spontaneous generalization, but other studies suggested effortful on-demand recombination of initially separate memories at retrieval. Here, we tested whether the tendency to separate vs. integrate related information may depend on a methodological detail of a traditional acquired equivalence paradigm.Human participants underwent feedback-based learning of overlapping face-scene associations, choosing a correct scene for a face from two options on each trial. Foil (incorrect) scenes were controlled for half of the participants to ensure that they can only learn from corrective feedback. The other half had foils selected randomly on each trial, allowing statistical learning of face-scene co-occurrence to supplement feedback-based learning. We hypothesized that the opportunity for statistical learning would boost learning and generalization and facilitate memory integration.The opportunity for statistical learning increased associative learning and generalization. However, rather than integrated memories, generalization was increased through learning during test.The results indicate that the tendency for generalization in the acquired equivalence is rather small, with no evidence for integrative encoding irrespective of group. The results inform current debates regarding encoding-based vs. retrieval-based mechanisms of generalization. They also highlight how methodological details may alter performance and the involvement of cognitive processes that underlie it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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