快速流程序中的连续性和阴影相互作用

IF 1.9 4区 心理学 Q3 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Learning & Behavior Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-17 DOI:10.3758/s13420-023-00582-4
José A Alcalá, Ralph R Miller, Richard D Kirkden, Gonzalo P Urcelay
{"title":"快速流程序中的连续性和阴影相互作用","authors":"José A Alcalá, Ralph R Miller, Richard D Kirkden, Gonzalo P Urcelay","doi":"10.3758/s13420-023-00582-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When multiple cues are associated with the same outcome, organisms tend to select between the cues, with one revealing greater behavioral control at the expense of the others (i.e., cue competition). However, non-human and human studies have not always observed this competition, creating a puzzling scenario in which the interaction between cues can result in competition, no interaction, or facilitation as a function of several learning parameters. In five experiments, we assessed whether temporal contiguity and overshadowing effects are reliably observed in the streamed-trial procedure, and whether there was an interaction between them. We anticipated that weakening temporal contiguity (ranging from 500 to 1,000 ms) should attenuate competition. Using within-subject designs, participants experienced independent series of rapid streams in which they had to learn the relationship between visual cues (presented either alone or with another cue) and an outcome, with the cue-outcome pairings being presented with either a delay or trace relationship. Across experiments, we observed overshadowing (Experiments 1, 2, 4, and 5) and temporal contiguity effects (Experiments 2, 3, and 4). Despite the frequent occurrence of both effects, we did not find that trace conditioning abolished competition between cues. Overall, these results suggest that the extent to which contiguity determines cue interactions depends on multiple variables, some of which we address in the General discussion.</p>","PeriodicalId":49914,"journal":{"name":"Learning & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10716097/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contiguity and overshadowing interactions in the rapid-streaming procedure.\",\"authors\":\"José A Alcalá, Ralph R Miller, Richard D Kirkden, Gonzalo P Urcelay\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13420-023-00582-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>When multiple cues are associated with the same outcome, organisms tend to select between the cues, with one revealing greater behavioral control at the expense of the others (i.e., cue competition). However, non-human and human studies have not always observed this competition, creating a puzzling scenario in which the interaction between cues can result in competition, no interaction, or facilitation as a function of several learning parameters. In five experiments, we assessed whether temporal contiguity and overshadowing effects are reliably observed in the streamed-trial procedure, and whether there was an interaction between them. We anticipated that weakening temporal contiguity (ranging from 500 to 1,000 ms) should attenuate competition. Using within-subject designs, participants experienced independent series of rapid streams in which they had to learn the relationship between visual cues (presented either alone or with another cue) and an outcome, with the cue-outcome pairings being presented with either a delay or trace relationship. Across experiments, we observed overshadowing (Experiments 1, 2, 4, and 5) and temporal contiguity effects (Experiments 2, 3, and 4). Despite the frequent occurrence of both effects, we did not find that trace conditioning abolished competition between cues. Overall, these results suggest that the extent to which contiguity determines cue interactions depends on multiple variables, some of which we address in the General discussion.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning & Behavior\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10716097/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning & Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-023-00582-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-023-00582-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当多个线索与相同的结果相关联时,生物倾向于在线索之间进行选择,其中一个线索显示出更强的行为控制能力,而其他线索则会受到影响(即线索竞争)。然而,非人类和人类的研究并不总能观察到这种竞争,这就造成了一种令人费解的情况,即线索之间的相互作用会导致竞争、无相互作用或促进作用,这与几个学习参数有关。在五项实验中,我们评估了在流式试验程序中是否能可靠地观察到时间连续性和阴影效应,以及它们之间是否存在相互作用。我们预计,削弱时间连续性(从 500 毫秒到 1,000 毫秒不等)应该会削弱竞争。采用被试内设计,被试经历了一系列独立的快速流,在这些快速流中,他们必须学习视觉线索(单独呈现或与另一线索一起呈现)与结果之间的关系,线索与结果的配对以延迟或追踪关系呈现。在所有实验中,我们观察到了阴影效应(实验 1、2、4 和 5)和时间毗连效应(实验 2、3 和 4)。尽管这两种效应经常出现,但我们并没有发现踪迹条件反射取消了线索之间的竞争。总之,这些结果表明,连续性在多大程度上决定了线索之间的相互作用取决于多个变量,我们将在总论中讨论其中的一些变量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Contiguity and overshadowing interactions in the rapid-streaming procedure.

Contiguity and overshadowing interactions in the rapid-streaming procedure.

When multiple cues are associated with the same outcome, organisms tend to select between the cues, with one revealing greater behavioral control at the expense of the others (i.e., cue competition). However, non-human and human studies have not always observed this competition, creating a puzzling scenario in which the interaction between cues can result in competition, no interaction, or facilitation as a function of several learning parameters. In five experiments, we assessed whether temporal contiguity and overshadowing effects are reliably observed in the streamed-trial procedure, and whether there was an interaction between them. We anticipated that weakening temporal contiguity (ranging from 500 to 1,000 ms) should attenuate competition. Using within-subject designs, participants experienced independent series of rapid streams in which they had to learn the relationship between visual cues (presented either alone or with another cue) and an outcome, with the cue-outcome pairings being presented with either a delay or trace relationship. Across experiments, we observed overshadowing (Experiments 1, 2, 4, and 5) and temporal contiguity effects (Experiments 2, 3, and 4). Despite the frequent occurrence of both effects, we did not find that trace conditioning abolished competition between cues. Overall, these results suggest that the extent to which contiguity determines cue interactions depends on multiple variables, some of which we address in the General discussion.

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
Learning & Behavior
Learning & Behavior 医学-动物学
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Learning & Behavior publishes experimental and theoretical contributions and critical reviews concerning fundamental processes of learning and behavior in nonhuman and human animals. Topics covered include sensation, perception, conditioning, learning, attention, memory, motivation, emotion, development, social behavior, and comparative investigations.
×
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