Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany; Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit, London, UK.
Experimental Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Cognition. 2022 Apr;221:104984. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104984. Epub 2021 Dec 23.
Humans continuously categorise inputs, but only rarely receive explicit feedback as to whether or not they are correct. This implies that they may be integrating unsupervised information together with their sparse supervised data - a form of semi-supervised learning. However, experiments testing semi-supervised learning are rare, and are bedevilled with conflicting results about whether the unsupervised information affords any benefit. Here, we suggest that one important factor that has been paid insufficient attention is the alignment between subjects' internal representations of the stimulus material and the experimenter-defined representations that determine success in the tasks. Subjects' representations are shaped by prior biases and experience, and unsupervised learning can only be successful if the alignment suffices. Otherwise, unsupervised learning might harmfully strengthen incorrect assumptions. To test this hypothesis, we conducted an experiment in which subjects initially categorise items along a salient, but task-irrelevant, dimension, and only recover the correct categories when sufficient feedback draws their attention to the subtle, task-relevant, stimulus dimensions. By withdrawing feedback at different stages along this learning curve, we tested whether unsupervised learning improves or worsens performance when internal stimulus representations and task are sufficiently or insufficiently aligned, respectively. Our results demonstrate that unsupervised learning can indeed have opposing effects on subjects' learning. We also discuss factors limiting the degree to which such effects can be predicted from momentary performance. Our work implies that predicting and understanding human category learning in particular tasks requires assessment and consideration of the representational spaces that subjects entertain for the materials involved in those tasks. These considerations not only apply to studies in the lab, but could also help improve the design of tutoring systems and instruction.
人类不断对输入进行分类,但很少收到关于他们是否正确的明确反馈。这意味着他们可能正在将无监督信息与他们稀疏的监督数据结合起来——这是一种半监督学习形式。然而,测试半监督学习的实验很少,并且关于无监督信息是否提供任何益处的结果存在矛盾。在这里,我们认为一个重要的因素尚未得到充分关注,即被试对刺激材料的内部表示与决定任务成功的实验者定义表示之间的一致性。被试的表示受到先前的偏见和经验的影响,如果一致性足够,无监督学习才可能成功。否则,无监督学习可能会有害地强化错误的假设。为了检验这一假设,我们进行了一项实验,在该实验中,被试首先根据一个明显但与任务无关的维度对项目进行分类,只有在获得足够的反馈以引起他们对微妙的、与任务相关的刺激维度的注意时,才能恢复正确的类别。通过在学习曲线的不同阶段撤回反馈,我们测试了当内部刺激表示和任务足够或不够一致时,无监督学习是改善还是恶化了性能。我们的结果表明,无监督学习确实会对被试的学习产生相反的影响。我们还讨论了限制从瞬间表现预测这些影响程度的因素。我们的工作意味着,预测和理解特定任务中的人类分类学习需要评估和考虑被试用于这些任务的材料的表示空间。这些考虑不仅适用于实验室研究,还有助于改进辅导系统和教学的设计。