当反应选择变成赌博:自定节奏颜色辨别任务的错误后减速和加速

IF 3.1 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Collabra-Psychology Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1525/collabra.73052
Charlotte Eben, L. Vermeylen, Zhang Chen, W. Notebaert, I. Ivanchei, F. Verbruggen
{"title":"当反应选择变成赌博:自定节奏颜色辨别任务的错误后减速和加速","authors":"Charlotte Eben, L. Vermeylen, Zhang Chen, W. Notebaert, I. Ivanchei, F. Verbruggen","doi":"10.1525/collabra.73052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"People tend to slow down after committing an error in many tasks. However, some studies failed to observe such post-error slowing. Furthermore, recent work found speeding after another type of sub-optimal outcomes: people often speed up after losses in gambling situations. What features determine whether people slow down or speed up after sub-optimal outcomes (error vs. loss)? To answer this question, we focused on the role of task characteristics and control over the outcome, by making a task where we previously observed post-error slowing more like tasks where we previously observed post-loss speeding. First, we made a color-discrimination task completely self-paced (Experiment 1A) and added reward/punishment (Experiment 1B). In both experiments, post-error slowing was observed, without modulation by reward/punishment. We then manipulated task difficulty to investigate the influence of control over the outcome. Consistent with our predictions, control over the outcome modulated post-error adjustments, as participants slowed down after controllable errors, but sped up after uncontrollable errors (Experiment 3). Importantly, this effect was global as post-error speeding was observed when controllable and ’uncontrollable’ errors were intermixed (Experiment 2), suggesting an influence of overall task context. Thus, responses to sub-optimal outcomes might depend on the control over the outcome.","PeriodicalId":45791,"journal":{"name":"Collabra-Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When Response Selection Becomes Gambling: Post-error Slowing and Speeding in Self-paced Colour Discrimination Tasks\",\"authors\":\"Charlotte Eben, L. Vermeylen, Zhang Chen, W. Notebaert, I. Ivanchei, F. Verbruggen\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/collabra.73052\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"People tend to slow down after committing an error in many tasks. However, some studies failed to observe such post-error slowing. Furthermore, recent work found speeding after another type of sub-optimal outcomes: people often speed up after losses in gambling situations. What features determine whether people slow down or speed up after sub-optimal outcomes (error vs. loss)? To answer this question, we focused on the role of task characteristics and control over the outcome, by making a task where we previously observed post-error slowing more like tasks where we previously observed post-loss speeding. First, we made a color-discrimination task completely self-paced (Experiment 1A) and added reward/punishment (Experiment 1B). In both experiments, post-error slowing was observed, without modulation by reward/punishment. We then manipulated task difficulty to investigate the influence of control over the outcome. Consistent with our predictions, control over the outcome modulated post-error adjustments, as participants slowed down after controllable errors, but sped up after uncontrollable errors (Experiment 3). Importantly, this effect was global as post-error speeding was observed when controllable and ’uncontrollable’ errors were intermixed (Experiment 2), suggesting an influence of overall task context. Thus, responses to sub-optimal outcomes might depend on the control over the outcome.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45791,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Collabra-Psychology\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Collabra-Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.73052\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Collabra-Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.73052","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在许多任务中犯了错误后,人们往往会放慢速度。然而,一些研究未能观察到这种误差后的减缓。此外,最近的研究发现,在另一种次优结果之后,人们往往会加速:在赌博中输了钱之后。在次优结果(错误vs.损失)之后,是什么特征决定了人们是减速还是加速?为了回答这个问题,我们把重点放在了任务特征的作用和对结果的控制上,把我们之前观察到的错误后减速的任务变成了我们之前观察到的损失后加速的任务。首先,我们制作了一个完全自定节奏的辨色任务(实验1A),并增加了奖惩(实验1B)。在这两个实验中,观察到错误后的减缓,而不受奖励/惩罚的调节。然后,我们操纵任务难度来调查控制对结果的影响。与我们的预测一致,对结果的控制调节了错误后的调整,因为参与者在可控错误后放慢了速度,但在不可控错误后加快了速度(实验3)。重要的是,这种影响是全局的,因为当可控和“不可控”错误混合时,观察到错误后的加速(实验2),这表明整体任务环境的影响。因此,对次优结果的反应可能取决于对结果的控制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
When Response Selection Becomes Gambling: Post-error Slowing and Speeding in Self-paced Colour Discrimination Tasks
People tend to slow down after committing an error in many tasks. However, some studies failed to observe such post-error slowing. Furthermore, recent work found speeding after another type of sub-optimal outcomes: people often speed up after losses in gambling situations. What features determine whether people slow down or speed up after sub-optimal outcomes (error vs. loss)? To answer this question, we focused on the role of task characteristics and control over the outcome, by making a task where we previously observed post-error slowing more like tasks where we previously observed post-loss speeding. First, we made a color-discrimination task completely self-paced (Experiment 1A) and added reward/punishment (Experiment 1B). In both experiments, post-error slowing was observed, without modulation by reward/punishment. We then manipulated task difficulty to investigate the influence of control over the outcome. Consistent with our predictions, control over the outcome modulated post-error adjustments, as participants slowed down after controllable errors, but sped up after uncontrollable errors (Experiment 3). Importantly, this effect was global as post-error speeding was observed when controllable and ’uncontrollable’ errors were intermixed (Experiment 2), suggesting an influence of overall task context. Thus, responses to sub-optimal outcomes might depend on the control over the outcome.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Collabra-Psychology
Collabra-Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Collabra: Psychology has 7 sections representing the broad field of psychology, and a highlighted focus area of “Methodology and Research Practice.” Are: Cognitive Psychology Social Psychology Personality Psychology Clinical Psychology Developmental Psychology Organizational Behavior Methodology and Research Practice.
期刊最新文献
Characterizing Human Habits in the Lab. Breaking Ban: Belgium’s Ineffective Gambling Law Regulation of Video Game Loot Boxes Revisiting the Differential Centrality of Experiential and Material Purchases to the Self: Replication and Extension of Carter and Gilovich (2012) Cyberloafing: Investigating the Importance and Implications of New and Known Predictors Psychometric Properties of the Chilean Version of the Oviedo Grit Scale
×
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