2022
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-022-02197-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Human ageing is associated with more rigid concept spaces

Abstract: Prevalence-induced concept change describes a cognitive mechanism by which someone's definition of a concept shifts as the prevalence of instances of that concept changes. The phenomenon has real-world implications because this sensitivity to environmental characteristics may lead to substantial biases in judgements. While prevalence-induced concept change has been established in young adults, it is unclear how it changes as a function of human ageing. In this cross-sectional study, we explore how prevalence-i… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…3 Here, we find that participants had narrower decision thresholds when judging muscular stimuli than when judging overweight stimuli (MAP difference = 0.16, CI [0.06, 0.25], p = .001), suggesting that participants required less evidence to make decisions about muscular stimuli than overweight stimuli (Figure 6C). We also observed statistically robust posterior differences in nondecision times between overweight and muscular judgments (MAP difference = −0.007, CI [−0.001, 0.00], p = .03), such that men were slightly slower at encoding stimuli and executing responses when judging muscular stimuli, but the size of this difference was small (on the order of ∼1 ms.) and thus negligible (see also Devine et al, 2023 for a similar pattern). Critically, response times in the task were, on average, between 200 and 300 ms (Figure 6A), and thus encoding time differences between stimulus types on this scale can be deemed unimportant.…”
Section: Response Times and Computational Modeling Resultsmentioning
confidence: 57%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…3 Here, we find that participants had narrower decision thresholds when judging muscular stimuli than when judging overweight stimuli (MAP difference = 0.16, CI [0.06, 0.25], p = .001), suggesting that participants required less evidence to make decisions about muscular stimuli than overweight stimuli (Figure 6C). We also observed statistically robust posterior differences in nondecision times between overweight and muscular judgments (MAP difference = −0.007, CI [−0.001, 0.00], p = .03), such that men were slightly slower at encoding stimuli and executing responses when judging muscular stimuli, but the size of this difference was small (on the order of ∼1 ms.) and thus negligible (see also Devine et al, 2023 for a similar pattern). Critically, response times in the task were, on average, between 200 and 300 ms (Figure 6A), and thus encoding time differences between stimulus types on this scale can be deemed unimportant.…”
Section: Response Times and Computational Modeling Resultsmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. To help explain the descriptive differences we observed in responses and response times between stimulus types, and to probe the computational mechanisms underpinning sensitivity to concept change (Devine et al, 2023), we turned to DDM (Ratcliff & McKoon, 2008;Wiecki et al, 2013; see the Method and Analysis sections). All estimated fixed effects are summarized in Table 1, and intercepts per condition are shown in Figure 6B.…”
Section: Response Times and Computational Modeling Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Another reason for a reduced updating of transition probabilities in older adults could be that suboptimal transition learning rates in older adults reflect a greater tendency to perseverate on previous predictions in the elderly (Nassar et al, 2016). A greater rigidity of internal state spaces might be beneficial in some contexts (Devine et al, 2022) but is mal-adaptive in environments in which performance depends on a flexible adjustment of state space representations. To summarize, each of these computational explanations seems consistent with what is seen behaviorally (Bolenz et al, 2019;Hämmerer et al, 2018;Ruel, Bolenz, et al, 2021).…”
Section: Inefficient Updating Of Transition Probabilitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%