東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back to Search results for [ null ]

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

The relationship between the allocat...

University of Toronto (Canada).

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The relationship between the allocation of attentional resources toward error feedback and the ability to learn stimulus-response contingencies in an experiential manner.

Record Type:	Language materials, printed : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	The relationship between the allocation of attentional resources toward error feedback and the ability to learn stimulus-response contingencies in an experiential manner./
Author:	Shane, Matthew S.
Description:	113 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-06, Section: B, page: 3450.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International66-06B.
Subject:	Psychology, Behavioral. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=NR02649
ISBN:	9780494026496

The relationship between the allocation of attentional resources toward error feedback and the ability to learn stimulus-response contingencies in an experiential manner.
Shane, Matthew S.

The relationship between the allocation of attentional resources toward error feedback and the ability to learn stimulus-response contingencies in an experiential manner. - 113 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-06, Section: B, page: 3450.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Toronto (Canada), 2005.

The potential to learn in a given situation appears governed by the discrepancy between prediction and outcome. Attention allocated when such discrepancy is high should, therefore, promote greater learning than when such discrepancy is low. Four studies evaluated this hypothesis, by measuring and/or manipulating the allocation of attention toward contingent success or error feedback received during performance on a simple trial and error learning task. Study one indicated that greater levels of relative attention to error---heretofore referred to as reflective preference (RP)---enhanced the ability to learn the stimulus-response contingencies in the trial and error learning task. Moreover, such heightened RP was predictive of learning when evaluated both at the time of initial receipt of the feedback (indexed by PostRP) and upon subsequent retrieval of that information from memory (indexed by PreRP). In fact, PostRP, PreRP, and the PostRP x PreRP interaction term each contributed independently to the prediction of learning, and together accounted for over 40% of the variance in task learning. Study two replicated these findings, with fluid intelligence, crystallized intelligence, and the big-five personality constructs controlled. Thus, even with general measures of mental capacity and personality controlled, RP showed strong prediction of task learning. Studies three and four sought to manipulate level of PostRP by forcing exposure to error feedback for twice the duration of exposure to success feedback. These studies differed only in the absolute duration of exposure to the error/success feedback, with the critical ratio of exposure to the error/success feedback remaining constant across studies. Results indicated that regardless of absolute exposure duration, individuals who received the forced-exposure manipulation showed significantly improved levels of learning, particularly if they were naturally low in RP. These results, as a whole, suggest that RP may be an important component of learning ability, and may evaluate an aspect of this ability not tapped by standard measures of intelligence. The possibility that RP indexes the extent to which one's sheer processing capacity is utilized in the most efficient manner appears a consideration worthy of future investigation. In addition, it appears clear that learning ability can be improved through manipulation of RP levels. Although the forced-exposure manipulation utilized in the present studies was fairly low-intensity, the possibility that levels of RP can be trained remains an intriguing possibility.

ISBN: 9780494026496Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017677
Psychology, Behavioral.

The relationship between the allocation of attentional resources toward error feedback and the ability to learn stimulus-response contingencies in an experiential manner.
LDR:03498nam 2200253 a 45 001 852026
005 20100629
008 100629s2005 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780494026496
035 $a (UMI)AAINR02649
035 $a AAINR02649
040 $a UMI $c UMI
100 1 $a Shane, Matthew S. $3 1017676
245 1 4 $a The relationship between the allocation of attentional resources toward error feedback and the ability to learn stimulus-response contingencies in an experiential manner.
300 $a 113 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-06, Section: B, page: 3450.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Toronto (Canada), 2005.
520 $a The potential to learn in a given situation appears governed by the discrepancy between prediction and outcome. Attention allocated when such discrepancy is high should, therefore, promote greater learning than when such discrepancy is low. Four studies evaluated this hypothesis, by measuring and/or manipulating the allocation of attention toward contingent success or error feedback received during performance on a simple trial and error learning task. Study one indicated that greater levels of relative attention to error---heretofore referred to as reflective preference (RP)---enhanced the ability to learn the stimulus-response contingencies in the trial and error learning task. Moreover, such heightened RP was predictive of learning when evaluated both at the time of initial receipt of the feedback (indexed by PostRP) and upon subsequent retrieval of that information from memory (indexed by PreRP). In fact, PostRP, PreRP, and the PostRP x PreRP interaction term each contributed independently to the prediction of learning, and together accounted for over 40% of the variance in task learning. Study two replicated these findings, with fluid intelligence, crystallized intelligence, and the big-five personality constructs controlled. Thus, even with general measures of mental capacity and personality controlled, RP showed strong prediction of task learning. Studies three and four sought to manipulate level of PostRP by forcing exposure to error feedback for twice the duration of exposure to success feedback. These studies differed only in the absolute duration of exposure to the error/success feedback, with the critical ratio of exposure to the error/success feedback remaining constant across studies. Results indicated that regardless of absolute exposure duration, individuals who received the forced-exposure manipulation showed significantly improved levels of learning, particularly if they were naturally low in RP. These results, as a whole, suggest that RP may be an important component of learning ability, and may evaluate an aspect of this ability not tapped by standard measures of intelligence. The possibility that RP indexes the extent to which one's sheer processing capacity is utilized in the most efficient manner appears a consideration worthy of future investigation. In addition, it appears clear that learning ability can be improved through manipulation of RP levels. Although the forced-exposure manipulation utilized in the present studies was fairly low-intensity, the possibility that levels of RP can be trained remains an intriguing possibility.
590 $a School code: 0779.
650 4 $a Psychology, Behavioral. $3 1017677
650 4 $a Psychology, Experimental. $3 517106
690 $a 0384
690 $a 0623
710 2 $a University of Toronto (Canada). $3 1017674
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 66-06B.
790 $a 0779
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2005
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=NR02649