Charles Locurto, James Donohue, Amy Hasenauer, Daniel McMaster, Matthew Morrow, Gabriela Castro, Pilar Segura Tobarra, Alexandra Eckert
{"title":"这与模式有关:内隐学习中的模式和随机序列之间的选择。","authors":"Charles Locurto, James Donohue, Amy Hasenauer, Daniel McMaster, Matthew Morrow, Gabriela Castro, Pilar Segura Tobarra, Alexandra Eckert","doi":"10.1037/xan0000335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Three experiments examined the preference for pattern versus random sequences. In all experiments the elements composing the sequences were visual images presented sequentially on a touchscreen. Reinforcement was randomly programmed on .16 of the element presentations for each type of trial. For pattern sequences the elements occurred in the same order and at the same location on each presentation of the sequence. For random sequences the elements could occur in any order on a given trial. The experiments were conducted in two phases. In the first phase, termed forced-choice, subjects, male Silver Kings, were given either a pattern sequence or a random sequence to work on in a given trial. Subjects received this first phase until performance on each type of sequence was equated. In the second phase, termed free-choice, subjects could choose which of the two sequences to work on in each trial. Results indicated that although performance was equated between the two types of sequences in the forced-choice phase, when given the choice subjects selected the pattern sequence on 70 percent of the trials. This finding held in Experiments 1 and 2 although there were procedural differences between these two experiments. In Experiment 3 the reinforcement probability for random sequences was increased to be 50 percent higher than for pattern sequence. In this arrangement subjects chose random sequences on nearly 83 percent of the free-choice trials, indicating that the preference for pattern sequences was not intractable. Results suggest that the preference for pattern sequences that was observed when reinforcement was equated between the two types of sequences may have been the result of the added information concerning forthcoming element presentations that was available from pattern sequences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":54259,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"There's something about a pattern: Choice between pattern and random sequences in implicit learning.\",\"authors\":\"Charles Locurto, James Donohue, Amy Hasenauer, Daniel McMaster, Matthew Morrow, Gabriela Castro, Pilar Segura Tobarra, Alexandra Eckert\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/xan0000335\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Three experiments examined the preference for pattern versus random sequences. In all experiments the elements composing the sequences were visual images presented sequentially on a touchscreen. Reinforcement was randomly programmed on .16 of the element presentations for each type of trial. For pattern sequences the elements occurred in the same order and at the same location on each presentation of the sequence. For random sequences the elements could occur in any order on a given trial. The experiments were conducted in two phases. In the first phase, termed forced-choice, subjects, male Silver Kings, were given either a pattern sequence or a random sequence to work on in a given trial. Subjects received this first phase until performance on each type of sequence was equated. In the second phase, termed free-choice, subjects could choose which of the two sequences to work on in each trial. Results indicated that although performance was equated between the two types of sequences in the forced-choice phase, when given the choice subjects selected the pattern sequence on 70 percent of the trials. This finding held in Experiments 1 and 2 although there were procedural differences between these two experiments. In Experiment 3 the reinforcement probability for random sequences was increased to be 50 percent higher than for pattern sequence. In this arrangement subjects chose random sequences on nearly 83 percent of the free-choice trials, indicating that the preference for pattern sequences was not intractable. Results suggest that the preference for pattern sequences that was observed when reinforcement was equated between the two types of sequences may have been the result of the added information concerning forthcoming element presentations that was available from pattern sequences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54259,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000335\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000335","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
There's something about a pattern: Choice between pattern and random sequences in implicit learning.
Three experiments examined the preference for pattern versus random sequences. In all experiments the elements composing the sequences were visual images presented sequentially on a touchscreen. Reinforcement was randomly programmed on .16 of the element presentations for each type of trial. For pattern sequences the elements occurred in the same order and at the same location on each presentation of the sequence. For random sequences the elements could occur in any order on a given trial. The experiments were conducted in two phases. In the first phase, termed forced-choice, subjects, male Silver Kings, were given either a pattern sequence or a random sequence to work on in a given trial. Subjects received this first phase until performance on each type of sequence was equated. In the second phase, termed free-choice, subjects could choose which of the two sequences to work on in each trial. Results indicated that although performance was equated between the two types of sequences in the forced-choice phase, when given the choice subjects selected the pattern sequence on 70 percent of the trials. This finding held in Experiments 1 and 2 although there were procedural differences between these two experiments. In Experiment 3 the reinforcement probability for random sequences was increased to be 50 percent higher than for pattern sequence. In this arrangement subjects chose random sequences on nearly 83 percent of the free-choice trials, indicating that the preference for pattern sequences was not intractable. Results suggest that the preference for pattern sequences that was observed when reinforcement was equated between the two types of sequences may have been the result of the added information concerning forthcoming element presentations that was available from pattern sequences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition publishes experimental and theoretical studies concerning all aspects of animal behavior processes.