Edmunds C E R, Milton Fraser, Wills Andy J
a School of Psychology , University of Plymouth , Plymouth , UK.
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2015;68(6):1203-22. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2014.978875. Epub 2015 Jan 9.
The effects of two different types of training on rule-based and information-integration category learning were investigated in two experiments. In observational training, a category label is presented, followed by an example of that category and the participant's response. In feedback training, the stimulus is presented, and the participant assigns it to a category and then receives feedback about the accuracy of that decision. Ashby, Maddox, and Bohil (2002. Observational versus feedback training in rule-based and information-integration category learning. Memory & Cognition, 30, 666-677) reported that feedback training was superior to observational training when learning information-integration category structures, but that training type had little effect on the acquisition of rule-based category structures. These results were argued to support the COVIS (competition between verbal and implicit systems) dual-process account of category learning. However, a number of nonessential differences between their rule-based and information-integration conditions complicate interpretation of these findings. Experiment 1 controlled between-category structures for participant error rates, category separation, and the number of stimulus dimensions relevant to the categorization. Under these more controlled conditions, rule-based and information-integration category structures both benefited from feedback training to a similar degree. Experiment 2 maintained this difference in training type when learning a rule-based category that had otherwise been matched, in terms of category overlap and overall performance, with the rule-based categories used in Ashby et al. These results indicate that differences in dimensionality between the category structures in Ashby et al. is a more likely explanation for the interaction between training type and category structure than the dual-system explanation that they offered.
在两项实验中,研究了两种不同类型的训练对基于规则和信息整合类别学习的影响。在观察性训练中,呈现一个类别标签,随后是该类别的一个示例以及参与者的反应。在反馈训练中,呈现刺激,参与者将其归类,然后收到关于该决策准确性的反馈。阿什比、马多克斯和博希尔(2002年。基于规则和信息整合类别学习中的观察性训练与反馈训练。《记忆与认知》,30,666 - 677)报告称,在学习信息整合类别结构时,反馈训练优于观察性训练,但训练类型对基于规则类别结构的习得影响不大。这些结果被认为支持了类别学习的COVIS(言语和隐性系统之间的竞争)双过程理论。然而,他们基于规则和信息整合条件之间的一些非本质差异使这些研究结果的解释变得复杂。实验1针对参与者错误率、类别区分以及与分类相关的刺激维度数量,对类别结构进行了控制。在这些更可控的条件下,基于规则和信息整合的类别结构在相似程度上都从反馈训练中受益。实验2在学习一个基于规则的类别时保持了训练类型的这种差异,该类别在类别重叠和整体表现方面与阿什比等人使用的基于规则的类别相匹配。这些结果表明,与他们提出的双系统解释相比,阿什比等人研究中类别结构维度上的差异更有可能解释训练类型与类别结构之间的相互作用。