The effect of KR on ratings of pattern similarity

Breckenridge, Robert L.; Rankin, William C.; Wright, Arvis

doi:10.3758/bf03336294

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Only subjects receiving No-Feedback showed significantly improved detection of high magnitude GSRs over sessions while other groups showed slight decrements in performance over sessions. This finding is also consistent with the results of previous SCF studies (Breckenridge et al, 1969;Tracy & Evans, 1967) in which similar detrimental effects of feedback were reported, and provides additional support for viewing the GSR detection task as an example of SCF involving internal stimulus events. Ln these studies, the detrimental effect of feedback was thought to result from confusion arising from conflict between the perfect reliability of external feedback and the less than perfect reliability of the cues relevant to the probabilistic assignment of forms to schema families.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…It was found in the present study that external feedback was not required in order for subjects to differentiate between GSR and no-GSR trials, that is, to detect GSRs. This finding is consistent with the results of several studies on the effects of external feedback on SCF involving visual forms (Edmunds, Mueller, & Evans, 1966;Edmunds & Mueller, 1967;Tracy & Evans, 1967;Breckenridge, Rankin, & Wright, 1969). In these studies, both feedback and no-feedback subjects were reported to have learned to consistently assign previously undifferentiated visual forms to different schema families.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Feedback in a Forced‐Choice GSR Detection Task

Diekhoff¹

1976

Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies of the detection of internal events have failed to assess adequately the effects of external feedback on detection and identification of internal events. The purpose of the present study was to make use of a signal detection paradigm in an evaluation of feedback effects on the detection and identification of galvanic skin responses (GSRs). GSR detection was measured by the absolute difference between the areas above and below the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and reflected the extent to which subjects were able to differentiate between GSR and no‐GSR trials. GSR identification was measured by the area below the ROC curve and reflected the labeling strategy (accurate or reversed) chosen by the subjects. It was found that external feedback as to the presence or absence and relative magnitude of GSRs was not necessary for differentiation of GSR and no‐GSR trials, and that such feedback was detrimental to increased differentiation over sessions. External feedback may, however, have been useful in directing the attachment of identifying responses to the differentiated internal events. The similarity of these findings to findings reported in the schematic concept formation (SCF) literature was discussed. It was concluded that internal event detection tasks such as that used in the present study may be seen as examples of SCF involving internal stimulus events.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Effects of Feedback in a Forced‐Choice GSR Detection Task

Diekhoff¹

1976

Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While numerous authors (e.g., Miller, 1966;Edmonds & Mueller, 1967;Tracy, 1971) have offered hypotheses to account for the lack of facilitative effects of correction, the explanation initially proposed by Breckenridge, Rankin, and Wright (1969) seems most tenable; that is, on tasks in which there is a moderate level of stimulus redundancy, learning is possible on the ba si s 0 f in trin sic information alone. Intrinsic information, however, is less than perfectly reliable.…”

Section: Texas Christian University Fort Worth Texas 76129mentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of simple correction and functional feedback in schema learning

Smallwood

Arnoult

1974

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of knowledge of results (KR) in a schematic concept formation task was clarified by manipulating the specificity of information provided during feedback. Ss learned to discriminate between pairs of random forms from two schema families. Verbal correction was compared with a functional KR procedure in which the schema prototypes were superimposed over test stimuli. In no case did verbal correction improve learning in comparison with functional KR. Differences in acquisition persisted in a retention test.The development of the ability to categorize stimuli without external sources of information or prior familiarization with the relevant schema has been termed schematic concept formation (Evans, 1967). Studies have demonstrated that schematic concept formation can occur without extrinsic feedback or knowledge of results (KR) (Evans & Arnoult, 1967;Rosser, 1967). Other studies, including those by Tracy and Evans (1967) and Brown, Walker, and Evans (1968), have indicated further that the ability to learn to categorize visual patterns is not appreciably facilitated by KR in the form of simple "right-wrong" correction.As a plausible explanation for the occurrence of schematic concept formation without extrinsic feedback, Edmonds, Mueller, and Evans (1966) have suggested that information in the stimulus patterns themselves is sufficient to allow selection of relevant attributes in a fashion analogous to cluster analysis. This interpretation appears to be in accord with the Gibsons ' (1955) proposition that Ss can learn to differentiate higher order variables without extrinsic KR.Less easily explained is the striking fact that when correction is administered, little or no facilitation has been observed. While numerous authors (e.g., Miller, 1966; Edmonds & Mueller, 1967;Tracy, 1971) have offered hypotheses to account for the lack of facilitative effects of correction, the explanation initially proposed by Breckenridge, Rankin, and Wright (1969) seems most tenable; that is, on tasks in which there is a moderate level of stimulus redundancy, learning is possible on the ba si s 0 f in trin sic information alone. Intrinsic information, however, is less than perfectly reliable. Extrinsic feedback in the form of correction, in conjunction with the less than perfectly reliable intrinsic information, may confuse S and make it difficult for him to determine accurately why he is correct or incorrect. As a consequence, his performance level is not greater than, and may even be less than, he could achieve on the basis of intrinsic information alone. The learning of appropriate attributes assumed necessary to make perceptual discriminations in a schematic concept formation task may therefore be unimproved by the administration of KR in the form of correction.The purpose of the present study was to clarify the role of KR as it is administered in a schematic concept formation task. It was hypothesized that the administration of KR in conjunction with moderately redundant stimuli would not confuse S if the feedback was made ...

show abstract

The effect of KR on ratings of pattern similarity

Cited by 2 publications

References 11 publications

Effects of Feedback in a Forced‐Choice GSR Detection Task

Effects of Feedback in a Forced‐Choice GSR Detection Task

A comparison of simple correction and functional feedback in schema learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About