Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37439744›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition2023

Category relevance attenuates overshadowing in human predictive learning.

José A Alcalá, José Prados, Gonzalo P Urcelay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

José A AlcaláSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham.
José PradosSchool of Psychology, University of Derby.ORCID 0000-0002-0044-3456
Gonzalo P UrcelaySchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham.ORCID 0000-0003-4717-0181

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In situations in which multiple predictors anticipate the presence or absence of an outcome, cues compete to anticipate the outcome, resulting in a loss of associative strength compared to control conditions without additional cues. Critically, there are multiple factors modulating the magnitude and direction of such competition, although in some scenarios the effect of these factors remains unexplored. We sought to assess whether the relative salience of the elements in a compound of cues modulates the magnitude of the overshadowing effect in human predictive learning. Two separable categories (i.e., colors and symbols) were used in a predictive learning task. In Experiment 1, different groups of participants were granted with different time of exposure to a compound of cues belonging to different categories (color and symbol) to evaluate potential differences in the magnitude of overshadowing. Furthermore, we used posttest questionnaires to assess whether participants used either only one or both categories during training, and assessed if this impacted the magnitude of overshadowing. In general, overshadowing was not modulated by the time of exposition, except in the case of very short time of exposition with prominent learning about the most salient category. In Experiment 2, the relative salience of a category was biased via prior experience either with a biconditional discrimination or attending only the relevant category (either color or symbol). The previously relevant category was less prone to overshadowing, but not the alternative one. Results are discussed in light of attentional and configural theories of associative learning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

Association LearningLearningAttentionConditioning, ClassicalCuesHumans

Identifiers

PMID37439744
PMCPMC10339660

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.