ArticleJournal of cognition2022
Being in the Know: The Role of Awareness and Retrieval of Transient Stimulus-Response Bindings in Selective Contingency Learning.
Article in Journal of cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cling together, swing together? Assessing indirect retrieval of stimulus-response bindings for associated stimuli.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Context-specific adaptation for head fakes in basketball: a study on player-specific fake-frequency schedules.Psychological research · 2024Article
- Proactive response preparation contributes to contingency learning: novel evidence from force-sensitive keyboards.Psychological research · 2024Article
- One Link to Link Them All.Experimental psychology · 2024Article
- Core Mechanisms in Action Control: Binding and Retrieval.Journal of cognition · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies demonstrated that contingency learning can be both (a) unaware (Schmidt et al., 2007), and (b) explained in terms of an automatic retrieval of stimulus-response bindings from the last episode in which the cue stimulus has been presented (Giesen et al., 2020; Schmidt et al., 2020). We investigated whether learning is selective in a contingency learning paradigm in which pairs of salient and nonsalient cues that were equally predictive of responses to targets (digits) were presented simultaneously. In two pre-registered experiments (total N = 137), we found stronger contingency learning for salient compared to non-salient cues. Transient stimulus-response binding and retrieval processes did not contribute to these selective learning effects in contingency learning, which were instead driven by contingency awareness. Our findings indicate that under conditions of high saliency, contingency learning is mediated by conscious rule detection for which retrieval of transient stimulus-response bindings is irrelevant.
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.