Partial information and choice behavior in differential reward magnitude learning

Medin, Douglas L.

doi:10.3758/bf03328892

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Participants who initially found the value-learning task more challenging may have been oriented more toward value during the free-recall test, thus producing a positive relationship between trials-to-criterion and the effect of value free recall, opposite to what was observed with the effect of value on lexical decision. This indirect evidence of two distinct value-learning mechanisms may be related to similar dissociations in probabilistic value-learning strategies reported by others (Humphreys et al, 1968 ; Allen and Estes, 1972 ; Estes, 1972 ; Medin, 1972a ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…Participants were first presented with words in a two-alternative choice value-learning task, in which they learned, by trial-and-error with feedback, that half of the words led to a high-value reward and half of the words led to a low-value reward (also used by Madan and Spetch, 2012 ). This value-learning task is similar to previous reward-learning procedures used by Estes and others (e.g., Pubols, 1960 ; Estes, 1962 , 1966 , 1972 ; Humphreys et al, 1968 ; Allen and Estes, 1972 ; Medin, 1972a , b ) as well several more recent reward-learning studies (e.g., Johnsrude et al, 1999 , 2000 ; Frank et al, 2004 , 2006 ; Bayley et al, 2005 ; Pessiglione et al, 2006 ; Valentin and O’Doherty, 2009 ; Voon et al, 2010 ; Gradin et al, 2011 ). Participants were then presented with an unrewarded lexical decision task, in which words from the value-learning task were shown again.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

High Reward Makes Items Easier to Remember, but Harder to Bind to a New Temporal Context

Madan¹,

Fujiwara²,

Gerson³

et al. 2012

Front. Integr. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning through reward is central to adaptive behavior. Indeed, items are remembered better if they are experienced while participants expect a reward, and people can deliberately prioritize memory for high- over low-valued items. Do memory advantages for high-valued items only emerge after deliberate prioritization in encoding? Or, do reward-based memory enhancements also apply to unrewarded memory tests and to implicit memory? First, we tested for a high-value memory advantage in unrewarded implicit- and explicit-tests (Experiment 1). Participants first learned high or low-reward values of 36 words, followed by unrewarded lexical decision and free-recall tests. High-value words were judged faster in lexical decision, and more often recalled in free recall. These two memory advantages for high-value words were negatively correlated suggesting at least two mechanisms by which reward value can influence later item-memorability. The ease with which the values were originally acquired explained the negative correlation: people who learned values earlier showed reward effects in implicit memory whereas people who learned values later showed reward effects in explicit memory. We then asked whether a high-value advantage would persist if trained items were linked to a new context (Experiments 2a and 2b). Following the same value training as in Experiment 1, participants learned lists composed of previously trained words mixed with new words, each followed by free recall. Thus, participants had to retrieve words only from the most recent list, irrespective of their values. High- and low-value words were recalled equally, but low-value words were recalled earlier than high-value words and high-value words were more often intruded (proactive interference). Thus, the high-value advantage holds for implicit- and explicit-memory, but comes with a side effect: High-value items are more difficult to relearn in a new context. Similar to emotional arousal, reward value can both enhance and impair memory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

High Reward Makes Items Easier to Remember, but Harder to Bind to a New Temporal Context

Madan¹,

Fujiwara²,

Gerson³

et al. 2012

Front. Integr. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Briefly, the instructed studies presented explicit instructional cues indicating the reward value to be earned for successful recall (e.g., Weiner & Walker, 1966;Weiner, 1966;Tarpy & Glucksberg, 1966, 1968Loftus & Wickens, 1970;Eysenck & Eyesnck, 1982). The second set of studies in this period involved presenting two stimuli and rewards were earned for choosing the higher-value item (e.g., Estes, 1966Estes, , 1972Humphreys et al, 1968;Allen & Estes, 1972;Medin, 1972), and served as the primary inspiration for some recent studies Madan & Spetch, 2012).…”

Section: Insights Into Reward-memory Study Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fractionating the reward-memory literature: Instructed, item-related feedback, and item-unrelated feedback

Simonsen¹,

Madan²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last two decades, nearly one hundred studies have been published examining reward influences on memory. Implementations of reward-value procedures have varied markedly, as have other study characteristics, including images vs. words, intentional vs. incidental memory encoding, and recall vs. recognition tests. As such, the resulting state of the field has become unwieldy and somewhat difficult to identify consistent reward-memory effects from those that are inconsistent due to critical differences in the study methods. Here we provide an overview of these studies and fractionate their methods into three distinct procedures: instructed, item-related feedback, and item-unrelated feedback. Instructed studies tell participants of item-value associations during encoding with rewards earned during memory retrieval. In contrast, feedback studies ask participants to make responses during encoding, with rewards provided as feedback; memory retrieval itself is unrewarded. Some feedback studies require participants to make responses related to the to-be-remembered items, while others require participants to respond to an initial prompt before presenting an unrelated stimulus. While both procedures involve feedback, the first set of studies involves item-related feedback, and the second set has item-unrelated feedback. By fractionating the reward-memory literature into distinct procedures, an otherwise heterogenous mixture of study design characteristics becomes much more interpretable and the underlying cognitive mechanisms more clear. This additional clarity should improve predictions for future studies, as this framework helps identify which prior findings are more relevant, while also providing a summary of the current state of the field.

show abstract

Some Functions of Memory in Probability Learning and Choice Behavior

Estes

1976

Psychology of Learning and Motivation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Partial information and choice behavior in differential reward magnitude learning

Cited by 4 publications

References 5 publications

High Reward Makes Items Easier to Remember, but Harder to Bind to a New Temporal Context

High Reward Makes Items Easier to Remember, but Harder to Bind to a New Temporal Context

Fractionating the reward-memory literature: Instructed, item-related feedback, and item-unrelated feedback

Some Functions of Memory in Probability Learning and Choice Behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About