A signal detection analysis of contingency data

Learning and Behavior

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 250-263

  Allan, Lorraine G ^a   Siegel, Shepard ^a   Tangen, Jason M ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTINGENT VALUATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; NORMAL HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SIGNAL DETECTION; ADULT; PERCEPTION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PERCEPTION; SIGNAL DETECTION (PSYCHOLOGY); TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 23844533675     PISSN: 15434494     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/bf03196067     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. ALLAN, L. G. (1980). A note on measurement of contingency between two binary variables in judgment tasks. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 15, 147-149.
2. ALLAN, L. G. (1993). Human contingency judgments: Rule-based or associative? Psychological Bulletin, 114, 435-448.
3. ALLAN, L. G., & JENKINS, H. M. (1983). The effect of representations of binary variables on judgment of influence. Learning & Motivation, 14, 381-405.
4. ALLAN, L. G., & SIEGEL, S. (2002). A signal detection analysis of the placebo effect. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 25, 410-420.
5. ALLAN, L. G., & TANGEN, J. M. (2005). Judging relationships between events: How do we do it? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 22-27.
6. ALLAN, L. G., TANGEN, J. M., WOOD, R., & SHAH, T. (2003). Temporal contiguity and contingency judgments: A Pavlovian analogue. Integrative Physiological & Behavioral Science, 38, 214-229.
7. BLOUGH, D. S. (2004). Reaction time signatures of discrimination processes: Differential effects of stimulus similarity and incentive. Learning & Behavior, 32, 157-172.
8. COLLINS, D. J., & SHANKS, D. R. (2002). Momentary and integrative response strategies in causal judgment. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1138-1147.
9. DICKINSON, A. (2001). Causal learning: An associative analysis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54B, 3-25.
10. DICKINSON, A., SHANKS, D. R., & EVENDEN, J. (1984). Judgment of act-outcome contingency: The role of selective attribution. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 29-50.
11. GREEN, D. M., & SWETS, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
12. HEALY, A. F., & KUBOVY, M. (1978). The effects of payoffs and prior probabilities on indices of performance and cutoff location in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 6, 544-553.
13. KINCHLA, R. A., & ATKINSON, R. C. (1964). The effect of false-information feedback upon psychophysical judgments. Psychonomic Science, 1, 317-318.
14. MACMILLAN, N. A., & CREELMAN, C. D. (1991). Detection theory: A user's guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. RESCORLA, R. A., & WAGNER, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory (pp. 64-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
16. SHANKS, D. R. (1993). Human instrumental learning: A critical review of data and theory. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 319-354.
17. SHANKS, D. R., HOLYOAK, K. J., & MEDIN, D. L. (EDS.) (1996). The psychology of learning and motivation: Vol. 34. Causal learning. San Diego: Academic Press.
18. SIEGEL, S., & ALLAN, L. G. (1996). The widespread influence of the Rescorla-Wagner model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 314-321.
19. SWETS, J. A. (1973). The relative operating characteristic in psychology. Science, 182, 990-1000.
20. SWETS, J. A. (1988). Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science, 240, 1285-1293.
21. SWETS, J. A. (1996). Signal detection theory and ROC analysis in psychology and diagnostics: Collected papers. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. TANGEN, J. M., & ALLAN, L. G. (2003). The relative effect of cue interaction. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56B, 279-300.
23. TANGEN, J. M., & ALLAN, L. G. (2004). Cue-interaction and judgments of causality. Memory & Cognition, 32, 107-124.
24. TANNER, T. A., JR., HALLER, R. W., & ATKINSON, R. C. (1967). Signal recognition as influenced by presentation schedules. Perception & Psychophysics, 2, 349-358.
25. TANNER, T. A., JR., RAUK, J. A., & ATKINSON, R. C. (1970). Signal recognition as influenced by information feedback. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 7, 259-274.
26. VADILLO, M. A., MILLER, R. R., & MATUTE, H. (2005). Causal and predictive-value judgments, but not predictions, are based on cue-outcome contingency. Learning & Behavior, 33, 172-183.
27. WAGNER, A. R., & RESCORLA, R. A. (1972). Inhibition in Pavlovian conditioning: Application to a theory. In R. A. Boakes & M. S. Halliday (Eds.), Inhibition and learning (pp. 301-336). London: Academic Press.
28. WHITE, K. G., & WIXTED, J. T. (1999). Psychophysics of remembering. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 91-113.
29. WICKENS, T. D. (2002). Elementary signal detection theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
30. WIXTED, J. T., & GAITAN, S. C. (2002). Cognitive theories as reinforcement history surrogates: The case of likelihood ratio models of human recognition memory. Animal Learning & Behavior, 30, 289-305.