The dissociation between the recall of stimulus frequencies and the judgment of contingency allows the placement of the competition effect in the final causal processing stages

Psicologica

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 293-303

  Ramos Alvarez M M ^a   Catena, A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF JAÉN   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 28744458487     PISSN: 02112159     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (25)

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 (3), 435-448.
3. Baker, A.G.; Vallée-Tourangeau, F.; and Murphy, R.A. (2000). Asymptotic judgment of cause in a relative validity paradigm Memory & Cognition, 28 (3), 466-479.
4. Catena, A., Maldonado, A. & Cándido, A.. (1998). The effect of the frequency of judgment and the type or trials on covariation learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 481-495.
5. Chapman, G.B. and Robbins, S.J. (1990). Cue interaction in human contingency judgment. Memory & Cognition, 18 (5), 537-545.
6. Cheng, P. (1997). From covariation to causation: A Causal Power Theory. Psychological Review, 104 (2), 367-405.
7. Cheng, P. & Novick, L (1992). Covariation in natural causal induction. Psychological Review, 99 (2), 365-382.
8. Cobos, P.L., Caño, A, López, F.J., Luque, J.L., & Almaraz, J (2000). Does the type of judgement required modulate cue competition? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53B, 193-207
9. De Houwer, J. (2002). Forward blocking depends on retrospective inferences about the presence of the blocked cue during the elemental phase. Memory and Cognition, 30, 22-33.
10. Jones, F.W.; Wills, A.J.; and McLaren, I.P.L. (1998). Perceptual categorization: Connectionist modelling and decision rules. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51B (1), 33-58.
11. Kaufman, M.A. and Bolles, R.C. (1981). A nonassociative aspect of overshadowing. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 18, 318-320.
12. Matute, H., Arcediano, F., & Miller, R. (1996). Test question modulates cue competition between causes and between effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 22, 182-196.
13. Matzel, L.D.; Schachtman, T.R.; and Miller, R.R. (1985). Recovery of an overshadowed association achieved by extinction of the overshadowing stimulus. Learning and Motivation, 16, 398-412.
14. Miller, R.R., & Matzel, L.D. (1988). The comparator hypothesis: A response rule for the expression of associations. In G.H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Vol. 22 (pp. 51-92). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
15. Perales J.C., Catena A., Ramos M.M., y Maldonado A. (1999). Aprendizaje de relaciónes causales. Psicológica, 20, 163-193.
16. Price, P.C. and Yates, J.F. (1993). Judgmental overshadowing: Further evidence of cue interaction in contingency judgment. Memory & Cognition, 21 (5), 561-572.
17. Price, P.C. and Yates, J.F. (1995). Associative and rule-based accounts of cue interaction in contingency judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 21 (6), 1639-1655.
18. Reichenbach, H. (1956). The direction of time: Berkeley: University of California Press.
19. Salmon, W.C. (1984). Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton, NJ.: Princeton University Press.
20. Spellman, B. (1996a). Conditionalizing causality. In D.R. Shanks; K.J. Holyoak; & D.L. Medin, (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation Vol.34. Causal learning. (pp. 167-206). San Diego: Academic Press.
21. Spellman, B. (1996b). Acting as intuitive scientists: Contingency judgments are made while controlling for alternative potential causes. Psychological Science, 7, 337-342.
22. Shanks, D.R.; Holyoak, K.J.; and Medn, D.L. (Eds.). (1996). The Psychology of Learning and Motivation Vol.34. Causal learning. San Diego: Academic Press.
23. Suppes, P. (1970). A probabilistic theory of causality. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
24. Wagner, A.R. (1969). Stimulus validity and stimulus selection. In W. Honig and N. Mackintosh (Eds.), Fundamental issues in associative learning, (pp.90-122). Halifax, N.S.: Dalhousie University Press.
25. White, P.A. (2002).Causal judgment from contingency information: judging interactions between two causal candidates. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 819-838.