Action slips in food choices: A measure of habits and goal-directed control.

IF 1.9 4区 心理学 Q3 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Learning & Behavior Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-02-13 DOI:10.3758/s13420-023-00573-5
Katie M J Wood, Tina Seabrooke, Chris J Mitchell
{"title":"Action slips in food choices: A measure of habits and goal-directed control.","authors":"Katie M J Wood,&nbsp;Tina Seabrooke,&nbsp;Chris J Mitchell","doi":"10.3758/s13420-023-00573-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We report a new, simple instrumental action-slip task, which sets goal-directed action against putative S-R associations. On each training trial, participants were presented with one of two stimuli (blue or green coloured screen). One stimulus (S1) signalled that one joystick response (R1-left or right push) would earn one of two rewards (O1-jellybeans or Pringles points). A second stimulus (S2) signalled a different instrumental relationship (S2:R2-O2). On each test trial, participants were told which outcome could be earnt (O1/O2) on that trial. They were required to withhold responding until the screen changed colour to S1 or S2. On congruent test trials, the stimulus presented (e.g., S1) was associated with the same response (R1) as the outcome available on that trial (O1). On incongruent test trials, in contrast, the outcome (e.g., O1) preceded a stimulus that was associated with a different response (e.g., S2). Hence, in order to obtain the outcome (O1) on incongruent trials, participants were required to suppress any tendency they might have to make the response associated with the stimulus (R2 in response to S2). In two experiments, participants made more errors on incongruent than congruent trials. This result suggests that, on incongruent trials, the stimulus drove responding (e.g., S2 increased R2 responding) in a manner that was inconsistent with goal-directed action (e.g., R1 responding to obtain O1)-an action slip. The results are discussed in terms of popular dual-process theories of instrumental action and a single-process alternative.</p>","PeriodicalId":49914,"journal":{"name":"Learning & Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-023-00573-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We report a new, simple instrumental action-slip task, which sets goal-directed action against putative S-R associations. On each training trial, participants were presented with one of two stimuli (blue or green coloured screen). One stimulus (S1) signalled that one joystick response (R1-left or right push) would earn one of two rewards (O1-jellybeans or Pringles points). A second stimulus (S2) signalled a different instrumental relationship (S2:R2-O2). On each test trial, participants were told which outcome could be earnt (O1/O2) on that trial. They were required to withhold responding until the screen changed colour to S1 or S2. On congruent test trials, the stimulus presented (e.g., S1) was associated with the same response (R1) as the outcome available on that trial (O1). On incongruent test trials, in contrast, the outcome (e.g., O1) preceded a stimulus that was associated with a different response (e.g., S2). Hence, in order to obtain the outcome (O1) on incongruent trials, participants were required to suppress any tendency they might have to make the response associated with the stimulus (R2 in response to S2). In two experiments, participants made more errors on incongruent than congruent trials. This result suggests that, on incongruent trials, the stimulus drove responding (e.g., S2 increased R2 responding) in a manner that was inconsistent with goal-directed action (e.g., R1 responding to obtain O1)-an action slip. The results are discussed in terms of popular dual-process theories of instrumental action and a single-process alternative.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
食物选择中的动作失误:衡量习惯和目标导向的控制。
我们报告了一个新的、简单的工具性动作失误任务,该任务针对假定的S-R关联设置目标导向的动作。在每次训练试验中,参与者都会受到两种刺激中的一种(蓝色或绿色屏幕)。一个刺激(S1)表示一个操纵杆响应(R1向左或向右推)将获得两个奖励中的一个(O1果冻或品客积分)。第二刺激(S2)表示不同的工具关系(S2:R2-O2)。在每个试验中,参与者都被告知该试验的结果(O1/O2)。他们被要求在屏幕颜色变为S1或S2之前停止响应。在一致的测试试验中,所呈现的刺激(例如,S1)与该试验的结果(O1)相同的反应(R1)相关。相反,在不一致的测试试验中,结果(例如O1)先于与不同反应相关的刺激(例如S2)。因此,为了获得不一致试验的结果(O1),参与者被要求抑制他们可能不得不做出与刺激相关的反应的任何趋势(R2对S2的反应)。在两个实验中,参与者在不一致的试验中犯的错误多于一致的试验。这一结果表明,在不一致的试验中,刺激驱动的反应(例如,S2增加了R2的反应)与目标导向的动作(例如,R1反应以获得O1)不一致,这是一种动作失误。结果是根据流行的工具作用和单一过程替代的双重过程理论进行讨论的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Learning & Behavior
Learning & Behavior 医学-动物学
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Learning & Behavior publishes experimental and theoretical contributions and critical reviews concerning fundamental processes of learning and behavior in nonhuman and human animals. Topics covered include sensation, perception, conditioning, learning, attention, memory, motivation, emotion, development, social behavior, and comparative investigations.
期刊最新文献
Divergence in bonobo and chimpanzee social life. Early-life group size influences response inhibition, but not the learning of it, in Japanese quails. Why might animals remember? A functional framework for episodic memory research in comparative psychology Sexual selection for single song repertoires Measuring spontaneous episodic future thinking in children: Challenges and opportunities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1