Suppr超能文献

因果干预在多线索判断中的作用:对学习的正负效应

On the role of causal intervention in multiple-cue judgment: positive and negative effects on learning.

作者信息

Enkvist Tommy, Newell Ben, Juslin Peter, Olsson Henrik

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2006 Jan;32(1):163-79. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.1.163.

Abstract

Previous studies have suggested better learning when people actively intervene rather than when they passively observe the stimuli in a judgment task. In 4 experiments, the authors investigated the hypothesis that this improvement is associated with a shift from exemplar memory to cue abstraction. In a multiple-cue judgment task with continuous cues, the data replicated the improvement with intervention and participants who experimented more actively produced more accurate judgments. In a multiple-cue judgment task with binary cues, intervention produced poorer accuracy and participants who experimented more actively produced poorer judgments. These results provide no support for a representational shift but suggest that the improvement with active intervention may be limited to certain tasks and environments.

摘要

以往的研究表明,在判断任务中,当人们积极干预而不是被动观察刺激时,学习效果会更好。在4项实验中,作者研究了这样一种假设,即这种改善与从范例记忆到线索抽象的转变有关。在一个具有连续线索的多线索判断任务中,数据重复了干预带来的改善,并且更积极进行实验的参与者做出了更准确的判断。在一个具有二元线索的多线索判断任务中,干预导致了较低的准确性,并且更积极进行实验的参与者做出了更差的判断。这些结果不支持表征转变的观点,但表明积极干预带来的改善可能仅限于某些任务和环境。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验