• 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

确定因果顺序是否会影响人类偶然性学习中的线索选择:对尚克斯和洛佩斯(1996年)的评论

Determining whether causal order affects cue selection in human contingency learning: comments on Shanks and Lopez (1996).

作者信息

Waldmann M R, Holyoak K J

机构信息

Max Planck Institute for Psychological Research, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Mem Cognit. 1997 Jan;25(1):125-34. doi: 10.3758/bf03197290.

DOI:10.3758/bf03197290
PMID:9046875
Abstract

Shanks and Lopez (1996) reported three experiments in which they attempted to test whether causal order affects cue selection, and concluded that it does not. Their study provides an opportunity to highlight some basic methodological criteria that must be met in order to test whether and how causal order influences learning. In particular, it is necessary to (1) ensure that participants consistently interpret the learning situation in terms of directed cause-effect relations; (2) measure the causal knowledge they acquire; (3) manipulate causal order; and (4) control the statistical relations between cause and effect. With respect to these criteria, each experiment reported by Shanks and Lopez fails on multiple counts. Moreover, several aspects of the results reported by Shanks and Lopez are explained by causal-model theory, but not by associative accounts. Their study thus adds to a growing body of evidence from different laboratories indicating that human contingency learning can be guided by causal interpretation.

摘要

尚克斯和洛佩兹(1996年)报告了三项实验,他们试图检验因果顺序是否会影响线索选择,并得出结论认为不会。他们的研究提供了一个机会,以突出一些基本的方法标准,为了检验因果顺序是否以及如何影响学习,这些标准必须得到满足。具体而言,有必要(1)确保参与者始终根据有向因果关系来解释学习情境;(2)测量他们获得的因果知识;(3)操纵因果顺序;以及(4)控制因果之间的统计关系。就这些标准而言,尚克斯和洛佩兹报告的每项实验都在多个方面存在不足。此外,尚克斯和洛佩兹报告的结果的几个方面可以用因果模型理论来解释,但不能用联想理论来解释。因此,他们的研究增加了来自不同实验室的越来越多的证据,表明人类的偶然性学习可以由因果解释来指导。

相似文献

1
Determining whether causal order affects cue selection in human contingency learning: comments on Shanks and Lopez (1996).确定因果顺序是否会影响人类偶然性学习中的线索选择:对尚克斯和洛佩斯(1996年)的评论
Mem Cognit. 1997 Jan;25(1):125-34. doi: 10.3758/bf03197290.
2
Asymmetries in cue competition in forward and backward blocking designs: Further evidence for causal model theory.前向和后向阻断设计中线索竞争的不对称性:因果模型理论的进一步证据。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2007 Mar;60(3):387-99. doi: 10.1080/17470210601000839.
3
Causal order does not affect cue selection in human associative learning.因果顺序不影响人类联想学习中的线索选择。
Mem Cognit. 1996 Jul;24(4):511-22. doi: 10.3758/bf03200939.
4
Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: asymmetries in cue competition.因果模型中的预测性和诊断性学习:线索竞争中的不对称性。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1992 Jun;121(2):222-36. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.121.2.222.
5
Interference between cues of the same outcome depends on the causal interpretation of the events.同一结果的线索之间的干扰取决于对事件的因果解释。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2007 Mar;60(3):369-86. doi: 10.1080/17470210601000961.
6
The comparator theory fails to account for the selective role of within-compound associations in cue-selection effects.
Exp Psychol. 2006;53(4):316-20. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169.53.4.316.
7
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.
8
Cue interaction and judgments of causality: contributions of causal and associative processes.线索交互作用与因果判断:因果及联想过程的作用
Mem Cognit. 2004 Jan;32(1):107-24. doi: 10.3758/bf03195824.
9
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.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
False Memories for Affective Information in Schizophrenia.精神分裂症中情感信息的错误记忆
Front Psychiatry. 2016 Nov 30;7:191. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00191. eCollection 2016.
2
Models of covariation-based causal judgment: a review and synthesis.基于共变的因果判断模型:综述与综合
Psychon Bull Rev. 2007 Aug;14(4):577-96. doi: 10.3758/bf03196807.
3
Cue interaction and judgments of causality: contributions of causal and associative processes.线索交互作用与因果判断:因果及联想过程的作用

本文引用的文献

1
Causal order does not affect cue selection in human associative learning.因果顺序不影响人类联想学习中的线索选择。
Mem Cognit. 1996 Jul;24(4):511-22. doi: 10.3758/bf03200939.
2
Test question modulates cue competition between causes and between effects.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1996 Jan;22(1):182-96. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.22.1.182.
3
Judging interevent relations: from cause to effect and from effect to cause.
Mem Cognit. 1993 Nov;21(6):802-8. doi: 10.3758/bf03202747.
4
Mem Cognit. 2004 Jan;32(1):107-24. doi: 10.3758/bf03195824.
4
Predictive versus diagnostic causal learning: evidence from an overshadowing paradigm.预测性因果学习与诊断性因果学习:来自遮蔽范式的证据。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Sep;8(3):600-8. doi: 10.3758/bf03196196.
Assessment of the Rescorla-Wagner model.雷斯克拉-瓦格纳模型的评估
Psychol Bull. 1995 May;117(3):363-86. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.363.
5
Insensitivity to stimulus validity in human Pavlovian conditioning.
Q J Exp Psychol B. 1988 Nov;40(4):377-410.
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
Cue interaction in human contingency judgment.
Mem Cognit. 1990 Sep;18(5):537-45. doi: 10.3758/bf03198486.
8
Blocking observed in human eyelid conditioning.在人类眼睑条件反射中观察到的阻断现象。
Q J Exp Psychol B. 1991 Aug;43(3):233-56.
9
Trial order affects cue interaction in contingency judgment.试验顺序会影响偶然性判断中的线索交互作用。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1991 Sep;17(5):837-54. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.17.5.837.
10
Covariation in natural causal induction.自然因果归纳中的共变关系。
Psychol Rev. 1992 Apr;99(2):365-82. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.99.2.365.