Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41729757›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition2026

Is there a criterion in criterial learning? Insights from studying feedback delays.

Matthew J Crossley, Benjamin O Pelzer, F Gregory Ashby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Matthew J CrossleySchool of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University.ORCID 0000-0002-4062-1229
Benjamin O Pelzer
F Gregory AshbyDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara.

Funding

The Cognitive Neuroscience of Human Category LearningR01MH063760 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA · PI ASHBY, F. GREGORY, HELIE, SEBASTIEN · 2002 to 2018
$3.6M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH063760Public Health Service; National Institutes of Health
6 · The paper itself

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

PMID41729757
PMCPMC12931661

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.