ArticleScientific reports2024
Adaptively triggered comparisons enhance perceptual category learning: evidence from face learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Categorical learning is important and often challenging in both specialized domains, such as medical image interpretation, and commonplace ones, such as face recognition. Research has shown that comparing items from different categories can enhance the learning of perceptual classifications, particularly when those categories appear highly similar. Here, we developed and tested novel adaptively triggered comparisons (ATCs), in which errors produced during interactive learning dynamically prompted the presentation of active comparison trials. In a facial identity paradigm, undergraduate participants learned to recognize and name varying views of 22 unknown people. In Experiment 1, single-item classification trials were compared to a condition in which ATC trials were generated whenever a participant repeatedly confused two faces. Comparison trials required discrimination between simultaneously presented exemplars from the confused categories. In Experiment 2, an ATC condition was compared to a non-adaptive comparison condition. Participants learned to accuracy and speed criteria, and completed immediate and delayed posttests. ATCs substantially enhanced learning efficiency in both experiments. These studies, using a novel adaptive procedure guided by each learner's performance, show that adaptively triggered comparisons improve category learning.
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.