Individual differences in higher-level cognitive abilities do not predict overconfidence in complex task performance

Visser, Troy A. W.; Bender, Angela D.; Bowden, Vanessa; Black, Stephanie C.; Greenwell-Barnden, Jayden; Loft, Shayne; Lipp, Ottmar V.

doi:10.1016/j.concog.2019.102777

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 88 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whereas the traditional version used black or brown wooden blocks, the computerized versions use squares of a variety of colors. While in some articles, the color is not mentioned (Stoffers, Berendse, Deijen, & Wolters, 2003;Visser et al, 2019;Athar, Atef-Vahid, & Ashouri, 2020), it is mentioned in most others. Some articles used blue squares that change to red when they are highlighted and when they are selected by the participant (Kennedy et al, 2020;Kennedy et al, 2017;Kennedy, Wightman, Khan, Grothe, & Jackson, 2018).…”

Section: Colorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Corsi Blocks Task: Variations and coding with jsPsych

Gibeau¹

2021

TQMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Corsi Blocks Task is a widely used task in both clinical and experimental work. However, many versions exist, and it can be difficult to, firstly, choose between the variations of each parameter and, secondly, to program it in a computer software. No article has yet been published on the different versions of the computerized Corsi Blocks Task. Herein, we summarize possible variations of this task. We also provide an implementation of the task using jsPsych.

show abstract

Section: Colorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Corsi Blocks Task: Variations and coding with jsPsych

Gibeau¹

2021

TQMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Working memory is the ability to actively and effortfully maintain a small amount of information (the working memory capacity ) for a short amount of time, and to shield that information from interference from competing information; it plays a critical role in self-regulation ( 8 , 9 ). Although some research has suggested that Barratt Impulsivity scores (BIS-11) ( 10 ) are related to lower working memory capacity ( 11 ), most authors have observed null effects of the BIS-11 scale with working memory tasks, including the digit span task ( 12 , 13 ), the N-back task ( 14 – 16 ), the CANTAB test of spatial working memory ( 11 , 17 ), the O-Span task ( 18 ), or a composite of well-validated working memory tasks ( 19 ). In parallel, findings have been mixed on whether working memory training lowers BIS-11 scores ( 20 , 21 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impulsivity Relates to Multi-Trial Choice Strategy in Probabilistic Reversal Learning

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impulsivity is defined as a trait-like tendency to engage in rash actions that are poorly thought out or expressed in an untimely manner. Previous research has found that impulsivity relates to deficits in decision making, in particular when it necessitates executive control or reward outcomes. Reinforcement learning (RL) relies on the ability to integrate reward or punishment outcomes to make good decisions, and has recently been shown to often recruit executive function; as such, it is unsurprising that impulsivity has been studied in the context of RL. However, how impulsivity relates to the mechanisms of RL remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the relationship between impulsivity and learning in a reward-driven learning task with probabilistic feedback and reversal known to recruit executive function. Based on prior literature in clinical populations, we predicted that higher impulsivity would be associated with poorer performance on the task, driven by more frequent switching following unrewarded outcomes. Our results did not support this prediction, but more advanced, trial-history dependent analyses revealed specific effects of impulsivity on switching behavior following consecutive unrewarded trials. Computational modeling captured group-level behavior, but not impulsivity results. Our results support previous findings highlighting the importance of sensitivity to negative outcomes in understanding how impulsivity relates to learning, but indicate that this may stem from more complex strategies than usually considered in computational models of learning. This should be an important target for future research.

show abstract

“…Working memory capacity has been defined as the ability to maintain information (including goals) in working memory and to shield that information from interference from competing stimuli. Although some research has suggested that Barratt Impulsivity scores (BIS-11; (Patton et al, 1995) are related to lower working memory capacity (Berlin et al, 2005), most authors have observed null effects of this scale with working memory tasks, including the digit span task (Day et al, 2013;Lopez-Vergara et al, 2019), the N-back task (Mueller et al, 2017;Whitney et al, 2004;Zeng et al, 2013), the CANTAB test of spatial working memory (Berlin et al, 2005;Manning et al, 2013), the O-Span task (Lempert & Pizzagalli, 2010), or a composite of well-validated working memory tasks (Visser et al, 2019). In parallel, findings have been mixed on whether working memory training lowers BIS-11 scores (Brooks et al, 2017;Wanmaker et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impulsivity relates to multi-trial choice strategy in probabilistic reversal learning

Zou¹,

Lopez²,

Johnson³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impulsivity is defined as a trait-like tendency to engage in rash actions that are poorly thought out or expressed in an untimely manner. Previous research has found that impulsivity relates to deficits in decision making, in particular when it necessitates executive control or reward outcomes. Reinforcement learning (RL) relies on the ability to integrate valenced outcomes to make good decisions, and has recently be shown to often recruit executive function; as such, it is unsurprising that impulsivity has been studied in the context of RL. However, how impulsivity relates to the mechanisms of RL remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the relationship between impulsivity and learning in a reward-driven learning task with probabilistic feedback and reversal known to recruit executive function. Based on prior literature in clinical populations, we predicted that higher impulsivity would be associated with poorer performance on the task, driven by more frequent switching following unrewarded outcomes. Our results did not support this prediction, but more advanced, trial-history dependent analyses revealed specific effects of impulsivity on switching behavior following consecutive unrewarded trials. Computational modeling captured group-level behavior, but not impulsivity results. Our results support previous findings highlighting the importance of sensitivity to negative outcomes in understanding how impulsivity relates to learning, but indicate that this may stem from more complex strategies than usually considered in computational models of learning. This should be an important target for future research.

show abstract

Individual differences in higher-level cognitive abilities do not predict overconfidence in complex task performance

Cited by 11 publications

References 88 publications

The Corsi Blocks Task: Variations and coding with jsPsych

The Corsi Blocks Task: Variations and coding with jsPsych

Impulsivity Relates to Multi-Trial Choice Strategy in Probabilistic Reversal Learning

Impulsivity relates to multi-trial choice strategy in probabilistic reversal learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About