Individual Differences in the Evolution of Counting.

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Experimental psychology Pub Date : 2022-06-13 DOI:10.1027/1618-3169/a000546
Jasinta D. M. Dewi, Catherine Thevenot
{"title":"Individual Differences in the Evolution of Counting.","authors":"Jasinta D. M. Dewi, Catherine Thevenot","doi":"10.1027/1618-3169/a000546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The alphabet-arithmetic paradigm, in which adults are asked to add a numeral addend to a letter augend (e.g., D + 3 = G), was conceived to mimic the way children learn addition. Studies using this paradigm often conclude that procedural learning leads to the memorization of associations between operands and answers. However, as recently suggested, memorization might only be used by a minority of participants and only for problems with the largest addend. In the present paper, we aim at investigating these individual differences through transfer effects from trained problems to new ones. Participants were trained over 12 learning sessions, followed by 3 transfer sessions. A group of participants, that we called the nonbreakers, showed a linear function associating solution times and addends throughout the experiment. In this group, transfer was observed during the first transfer session, suggesting that a procedural strategy, transferable to new items, was still used at the end of training. In another group of participants, that we called the breakers, we observed a decrease in solution times for problems with the largest addend. In this group, transfer was only observed after two transfer sessions, suggesting that procedural strategies were not used as often in this group than in the other group. This was especially true for problems with the largest addend because transfer effects were stronger when they were excluded. Therefore, during learning and for breakers, the answers to problems with larger addends are retrieved first and, as for non-breakers, the answers to problems with very small operands remain computed.","PeriodicalId":12173,"journal":{"name":"Experimental psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000546","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The alphabet-arithmetic paradigm, in which adults are asked to add a numeral addend to a letter augend (e.g., D + 3 = G), was conceived to mimic the way children learn addition. Studies using this paradigm often conclude that procedural learning leads to the memorization of associations between operands and answers. However, as recently suggested, memorization might only be used by a minority of participants and only for problems with the largest addend. In the present paper, we aim at investigating these individual differences through transfer effects from trained problems to new ones. Participants were trained over 12 learning sessions, followed by 3 transfer sessions. A group of participants, that we called the nonbreakers, showed a linear function associating solution times and addends throughout the experiment. In this group, transfer was observed during the first transfer session, suggesting that a procedural strategy, transferable to new items, was still used at the end of training. In another group of participants, that we called the breakers, we observed a decrease in solution times for problems with the largest addend. In this group, transfer was only observed after two transfer sessions, suggesting that procedural strategies were not used as often in this group than in the other group. This was especially true for problems with the largest addend because transfer effects were stronger when they were excluded. Therefore, during learning and for breakers, the answers to problems with larger addends are retrieved first and, as for non-breakers, the answers to problems with very small operands remain computed.
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
计数进化中的个体差异。
字母算术范式要求成年人在字母被加数上加一个数字加数(例如,D+3=g),旨在模仿儿童学习加法的方式。使用这种范式的研究通常得出结论,程序性学习会导致操作数和答案之间的关联记忆。然而,正如最近所建议的,记忆可能只被少数参与者使用,并且只用于最大加数的问题。在本文中,我们旨在通过从训练问题到新问题的转移效应来研究这些个体差异。参与者接受了12次学习课程的培训,随后进行了3次转学课程。一组参与者,我们称之为非破坏者,在整个实验中展示了一个将求解时间和加数关联起来的线性函数。在这一组中,在第一次转移训练中观察到转移,这表明在训练结束时仍然使用可转移到新项目的程序性策略。在另一组参与者中,我们称之为断路器,我们观察到加数最大的问题的求解时间减少。在该组中,仅在两次转移后才观察到转移,这表明该组中程序策略的使用频率不如另一组。对于最大加数的问题尤其如此,因为当它们被排除在外时,转移效应更强。因此,在学习过程中,对于断路器,首先检索具有较大加数的问题的答案,对于非断路器,仍然计算具有非常小操作数的问题答案。
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
Experimental psychology
Experimental psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: As its name implies, Experimental Psychology (ISSN 1618-3169) publishes innovative, original, high-quality experimental research in psychology — quickly! It aims to provide a particularly fast outlet for such research, relying heavily on electronic exchange of information which begins with the electronic submission of manuscripts, and continues throughout the entire review and production process. The scope of the journal is defined by the experimental method, and so papers based on experiments from all areas of psychology are published. In addition to research articles, Experimental Psychology includes occasional theoretical and review articles.
期刊最新文献
Production and Preschoolers: Is There a Benefit and Do They Know? The Interaction Between the Production Effect and Serial Position in Recognition and Recall. The Role of Stimulus Uncertainty and Curiosity in Attention Control. Correction to Bozkurt et al., 2023. Justifying Responses Affects the Relationship Between Confidence and Accuracy.
×
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