• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

Cue interaction in human contingency judgment.

作者信息

Chapman G B, Robbins S J

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 19104.

出版信息

Mem Cognit. 1990 Sep;18(5):537-45. doi: 10.3758/bf03198486.

DOI:10.3758/bf03198486
PMID:2233266
Abstract

Most studies of human contingency judgment have been based on the assumption that frequency information about one predictor is assessed in isolation of information about other predictors. Recent evidence, however, suggests that the judged predictive strength of one cue is influenced by the predictive strengths of other copresent cues. Two experiments demonstrate that stimuli with the same outcome contingencies may nonetheless have different predictive strengths as the result of cue interaction. The first experiment, in which a within-subject design was used, provides a demonstration of blocking. A stimulus presented in compound with a strong predictor was rated as less predictive than another stimulus that was presented in compound with a nonpredictive cue. In the second experiment, cue interactions in conditioned inhibition were examined. A stimulus gained negative predictive strength as the result of compound presentations with a positive predictor when the outcome was not presented. This negative predictor was compared with an otherwise analogous stimulus that was not presented in compound with a positive predictor. These results support the use of animal-conditioning models as accounts of human contingency learning.

摘要

相似文献

1
Cue interaction in human contingency judgment.
Mem Cognit. 1990 Sep;18(5):537-45. doi: 10.3758/bf03198486.
2
Selective attention in human associative learning and recognition memory.人类联想学习与识别记忆中的选择性注意
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2008 Nov;137(4):626-48. doi: 10.1037/a0013685.
3
Cue interaction effects in causal judgement: an interpretation in terms of the evidential evaluation model.因果判断中的线索交互效应:基于证据评估模型的解释
Q J Exp Psychol B. 2005 Apr;58(2):99-140. doi: 10.1080/02724990444000078.
4
Predictions and causal estimations are not supported by the same associative structure.预测和因果估计并不由相同的关联结构所支持。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2007 Mar;60(3):433-47. doi: 10.1080/17470210601002520.
5
Contrasting cue-density effects in causal and prediction judgments.因果判断和预测判断中的线索密度效应对比。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2011 Feb;18(1):110-5. doi: 10.3758/s13423-010-0032-2.
6
Statistical contingency has a different impact on preparation judgements than on causal judgements.统计偶然性对准备判断的影响与对因果判断的影响不同。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2007 Mar;60(3):418-32. doi: 10.1080/17470210601001084.
7
Learning about cues that prevent an outcome: conditioned inhibition and differential inhibition in human predictive learning.
Q J Exp Psychol B. 2004 Apr;57(2):153-78. doi: 10.1080/02724990344000033.
8
On the role of causal intervention in multiple-cue judgment: positive and negative effects on learning.因果干预在多线索判断中的作用:对学习的正负效应
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2006 Jan;32(1):163-79. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.1.163.
9
The relative effect of cue interaction.线索交互作用的相对效应。
Q J Exp Psychol B. 2003 Aug;56(3):279-300. doi: 10.1080/02724990244000278.
10
Base rates, contingencies, and prediction behavior.基础概率、偶然性与预测行为。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 Mar;35(2):371-80. doi: 10.1037/a0014545.

引用本文的文献

1
The effects of incidental learning and input frequency on the perception of non-native speech.附带学习和输入频率对非母语语音感知的影响。
Second Lang Res. 2025 Apr;41(2):367-396. doi: 10.1177/02676583241249348. Epub 2024 May 23.
2
A logical framework to study concept-learning biases in the presence of multiple explanations.一种在存在多种解释的情况下研究概念学习偏差的逻辑框架。
Behav Res Methods. 2022 Feb;54(1):233-251. doi: 10.3758/s13428-021-01596-4. Epub 2021 Jun 18.
3
Persistence of Causal Illusions After Extensive Training.

本文引用的文献

1
A model for Pavlovian learning: variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli.一种巴甫洛夫式学习模型:条件刺激而非无条件刺激有效性的变化。
Psychol Rev. 1980 Nov;87(6):532-52.
2
A rule analysis of judgments of covariation between events.
Mem Cognit. 1980 Sep;8(5):459-67. doi: 10.3758/bf03211142.
3
Assessment of covariation by humans and animals: the joint influence of prior expectations and current situational information.
Psychol Rev. 1984 Jan;91(1):112-49.
4
经过大量训练后因果错觉的持续性。
Front Psychol. 2019 Jan 24;10:24. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00024. eCollection 2019.
4
Compound Stimulus Presentation Does Not Deepen Extinction in Human Causal Learning.复合刺激呈现不会加深人类因果学习中的消退。
Front Psychol. 2017 Feb 9;8:120. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00120. eCollection 2017.
5
Single- and Dual-Process Models of Biased Contingency Detection.偏差性意外事件检测的单过程和双过程模型
Exp Psychol. 2016 Jan;63(1):3-19. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000309.
6
Transitive reasoning distorts induction in causal chains.传递性推理会扭曲因果链中的归纳。
Mem Cognit. 2016 Apr;44(3):469-87. doi: 10.3758/s13421-015-0568-5.
7
Illusions of causality: how they bias our everyday thinking and how they could be reduced.因果关系错觉:它们如何影响我们的日常思维以及如何减少这些错觉
Front Psychol. 2015 Jul 2;6:888. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00888. eCollection 2015.
8
Explaining compound generalization in associative and causal learning through rational principles of dimensional generalization.通过维度泛化的理性原则解释联想学习和因果学习中的复合泛化。
Psychol Rev. 2014 Jul;121(3):526-58. doi: 10.1037/a0037018.
9
Revisiting the learning curve (once again).重温学习曲线(再一次)。
Front Psychol. 2013 Dec 26;4:982. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00982. eCollection 2013.
10
On the origin of personal causal theories.个人因果理论的起源。
Psychon Bull Rev. 1995 Mar;2(1):83-104. doi: 10.3758/BF03214413.
The display of information and the judgment of contingency.
Can J Psychol. 1965 Sep;19(3):231-41. doi: 10.1037/h0082908.
5
Continuous monitoring of human contingency judgment across trials.
Mem Cognit. 1985 Mar;13(2):158-67. doi: 10.3758/bf03197008.
6
From conditioning to category learning: an adaptive network model.从条件作用到类别学习:一种自适应网络模型。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1988 Sep;117(3):227-47. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.117.3.227.
7
Selectional processes in causality judgment.因果判断中的选择过程。
Mem Cognit. 1989 Jan;17(1):27-34. doi: 10.3758/bf03199554.