ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition2026
Is there a criterion in criterial learning? Insights from studying feedback delays.
Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2026. 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
The notion of a response criterion is ubiquitous in psychology, yet its cognitive and neural underpinnings remain poorly understood. Two experiments and extensive computational modeling were used to test between two strikingly different interpretations of the criterion. The traditional account is that decisions are made by comparing the stimulus value to a stored value of the criterion. A conceptually different interpretation is that learning instead is a process of associating responses with stimuli and that the criterion is simply the hypothetical value that separates stimuli associated with contrasting responses. The experiments and modeling tested between these two interpretations by contrasting the effects on criterial learning of feedback delays versus increases in the duration of the intertrial interval in a one-dimensional category-learning task. The empirical results strongly suggested that human criterial learning is sensitive to feedback delay but not to the duration of the intertrial interval. The computational modeling showed that these results are compatible with a stimulus-response learning account, and incompatible with all versions of the stored-criterion account, except for the subset of these models that explicitly assume the criterial updating process is sensitive to feedback delay. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.