Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2021 Feb;47(2):316-342. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000812. Epub 2020 Feb 27.
Participants gave recognition judgments for short lists of pictures of everyday objects. Pictures in a given list were an equal mixture of three types that varied according to the way they were used as targets and foils earlier in the same session. Under consistent-mapping (CM), targets and foils never switch roles; under varied-mapping (VM), targets and foils switch roles randomly across trials; whereas all-new (AN) items are novel on each trial of the experiment. Past research has shown that markedly enhanced performance occurs in CM conditions, leading to conclusions that item-response learning takes place in CM, perhaps automatically. However, almost all past research has compared CM, VM, and AN performance in between-blocks designs in which participants may adopt different cognitive strategies and criterion settings across the conditions. The present mixed-list design holds constant the strategy and criterion settings that are used for CM, VM, and AN items, and produced patterns of performance dramatically different than those observed in pure-list control conditions. We develop an extended version of an exemplar-based random-walk model of probe recognition to account for the major qualitative effects in the data. The data and the modeling provide evidence for strong item-response learning for CM foils but weak item-response learning for CM targets. We consider possible explanations for these effects in our General Discussion. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
参与者对日常物体图片的简短列表进行识别判断。给定列表中的图片是根据它们在同一会话的早期作为目标和干扰项的使用方式而变化的三种类型的均等混合。在一致映射(CM)下,目标和干扰项永远不会改变角色;在多变映射(VM)下,目标和干扰项在每次试验中随机改变角色;而所有新(AN)项目在每次实验中都是新颖的。过去的研究表明,CM 条件下的表现明显增强,导致人们得出结论,即项目反应学习发生在 CM 中,可能是自动的。然而,几乎所有过去的研究都在块间设计中比较了 CM、VM 和 AN 的性能,在这种设计中,参与者可能在不同的条件下采用不同的认知策略和标准设置。本混合列表设计保持了 CM、VM 和 AN 项目使用的策略和标准设置不变,产生的性能模式与纯列表对照条件下观察到的模式明显不同。我们开发了基于范例的随机游走模型的扩展版本,以解释数据中的主要定性效应。数据和建模为 CM 干扰项的强烈项目反应学习提供了证据,但为 CM 目标的弱项目反应学习提供了证据。在我们的一般讨论中,我们考虑了这些影响的可能解释。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2021 APA,保留所有权利)。