ArticleMemory & cognition2021
Category learning in a transitive inference paradigm.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emergent neural dynamics and geometry for generalization in a transitive inference task.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Category learning in a recurrent neural network with reinforcement learning.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The implied order of a ranked set of visual images can be learned without reliance on information that explicitly signals their order. Such learning is difficult to explain by associative mechanisms, but can be accounted for by cognitive representations and processes such as transitive inference. Our study sought to determine if those processes also apply to learning categories of images. We asked whether participants can (a) infer that stimulus images belonged to familiar categories, even when the images for each trial were unique, and (b) sort those categories into an ordering that obeys transitivity. Participants received minimal verbal instruction and a single session of training. Despite this, they learned the implied order of lists of fixed stimuli and lists of ordered categories, using trial-unique exemplars. We trained two groups, one for which stimuli were constant throughout training and testing (n = 60), and one for which exemplars of each category were trial-unique (n = 50). Our findings suggest that differing cognitive processes may underpin serial learning when learning about specific stimuli as opposed to stimulus categories.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.