Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37069410›Full record

ArticleLearning & behavior2023

Contiguity and overshadowing interactions in the rapid-streaming procedure.

José A Alcalá, Ralph R Miller, Richard D Kirkden, Gonzalo P Urcelay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Learning & behavior, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Further evidence for the role of temporal contiguity as a determinant of overshadowing.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2024
    Article
  4. Cue duration and trial spacing effects in contingency assessment in the streaming procedure with humans.Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition · 2024
    Article
  5. Category relevance attenuates overshadowing in human predictive learning.Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

José A AlcaláSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0092-1462
Ralph R MillerDepartment of Psychology, State University of New York at Binghamton, Binghamton, NY, USA.
Richard D KirkdenDepartment of Neuroscience, Psychology and Behaviour, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Gonzalo P UrcelaySchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK. gonzalo.urcelay@nottingham.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When multiple cues are associated with the same outcome, organisms tend to select between the cues, with one revealing greater behavioral control at the expense of the others (i.e., cue competition). However, non-human and human studies have not always observed this competition, creating a puzzling scenario in which the interaction between cues can result in competition, no interaction, or facilitation as a function of several learning parameters. In five experiments, we assessed whether temporal contiguity and overshadowing effects are reliably observed in the streamed-trial procedure, and whether there was an interaction between them. We anticipated that weakening temporal contiguity (ranging from 500 to 1,000 ms) should attenuate competition. Using within-subject designs, participants experienced independent series of rapid streams in which they had to learn the relationship between visual cues (presented either alone or with another cue) and an outcome, with the cue-outcome pairings being presented with either a delay or trace relationship. Across experiments, we observed overshadowing (Experiments 1, 2, 4, and 5) and temporal contiguity effects (Experiments 2, 3, and 4). Despite the frequent occurrence of both effects, we did not find that trace conditioning abolished competition between cues. Overall, these results suggest that the extent to which contiguity determines cue interactions depends on multiple variables, some of which we address in the General discussion.

Indexed as

CuesLearningAnimalsAssociation LearningHumansCue competitionOvershadowingRapid trial streamingTemporal contiguity

Identifiers

PMID37069410
PMCPMC10716097

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.