Inattentional blindness for negative relationships in human causal learning

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 59, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 457-470

  Maldonado, Antonio ^a,c   Jiménez, Gracia ^a   Herrera, Amparo ^a   Perales, José C ^b   Catena, Andrés ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c Instituto Carlos I de Física Tórica y Computacional   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; AFFECT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; HUMAN; LEARNING; PERCEPTION DISORDER; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; VISION;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; AFFECT; ATTENTION; HUMANS; LEARNING; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PERCEPTUAL DISORDERS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 33645078161     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02724980443000854     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Allan, L. (1993). Human contingency judgements: Rule based or associative? Psychological Bulletin, 114, 435-448.
2. Buehner, M. J., Cheng, P. W., & Clifford, D. (2003). from covariation to causation: A test of the assumption of causal power. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 1119-1140.
3. Catena, A., Maldonado, A., & Cándido, A. (1998). The effect of the frequency of judgements and the type of trial on covariation learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 481-495.
4. Catena, A., Maldonado, A., Megías, J. L., & Frese, B. (2002). The frequency of judgements effect: Belief revision and serial processing of causal information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55B, 267-281.
5. Cheng, P. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (1995). Complex adaptive systems as intuitive statisticians: Causality, contingency, and prediction. In H. L. Roitblat & J. A. Meyer (Eds.), Comparative approaches to cognitive science. Complex adaptive systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
6. Cheng, P., & Novick, L. R. (1992). Covariation in natural causal induction. Psychological Review, 99, 365-382.
7. Collins, D. J., & Shanks, D. R. (2002). Momentary and integrative response strategies in causal judgements. Memory and Cognition, 30, 1138-1147.
8. De Houwer, J., & Beckers, T. (2002). A review of recent developments in research and theories on human contingency learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55B, 289-310.
9. Dickinson, A., & Burke, J. (1996). Within-compound associations mediate the retrospective revaluation of causality judgements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49B, 60-80.
10. Gluck, M., & Bower, G. H. (1988). From conditioning to category learning: An adaptive network model. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 117, 227-224.
11. Konorski, J. (1967). Integrative activity of the brain. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12. Kruschke, J. (2001). Toward a unified model of attention in associative learning. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 45, 812-863.
13. Kruschke, J. (2002) The inverse rate effect is not explained by eliminative inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1385-1400.
14. López, F., Almaraz, J., Fernández, P., & Shanks, D. (1999). Gradual acquisition of knowledge of predictive relationships: Learning curves in contingency judgements. Psicothema, 11, 337-349.
15. Mackintosh, N. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276-298.
16. Maldonado, A., Catena, A., Cándido, A., & García, I. (1999). The belief revision model: Asymmetrical effects of no contingency on human covariation learning. Animal Learning & Behavior, 27, 168-180.
17. Mandel, D., & Lehman, D. (1998). Integration of contingency information in judgements of cause, covariation, and probability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 269-285.
18. Pearl, J. (2000). Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19. Perales, J. C., & Shanks, D. R. (2003). Normative and descriptive accounts of the influence of power and contingency on causal judgement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 977-1007.
20. Rossnagel, C. (2001). Revealing hidden covariation detection: Evidence for implicit abstraction at study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1276-1288.
21. Shanks, D. R., Holyoak, K., & Medin, D. L. (Ed.). (1996a). Causal learning. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
22. Shanks, D. R., López, F., Darby, R., &. Dickinson, A. (1996b). Distinguishing associative and probabilistic contrast theories of human contingency judgements. In D. R. Shanks, K. Holyoak, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Causal learning (Vol. 34, pp. 89-1331). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
23. Simons, D., & Chabris, C. (1999) Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28, 1059-1074.
24. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22.
25. Smedslund, J. (1963). The concept of correlation in adults. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 4, 165-173.
26. Spellman, B. A. (1996). Acting as intuitive scientists: Contingency judgements are made while controlling for alternative potential causes. Psychological Science, 7(6), 337-342.
27. Van-Hamme, L. J., & Wasserman, E. A. (1994). Cue competition in causality judgements: The role of nonpresentation of compound stimulus elements. Learning and Motivation, 25, 127-151.
28. Wagner, A. R., & Brandon, S. E. (1989). Evolution of a structured connectionist model of pavlovian conditioning (AESOP). In S. Klein & R. R. Mowrer (Eds.), Contemporary learning theories (pp. 149-189). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
29. Waldmann, M. R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1992). Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 222-236.
30. Waldmann, M. R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Determining whether causal order affects cue selection in human contingency learning: Comments on Shanks and Lopez (1996). Memory and Cognition, 25, 125-134.
31. Waldmann, M. R., & Martignon, L. (1998). A Bayesian network model of causal learning. Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
32. Williams, D. (1996). A comparative analysis of negative contingency learning in humans and nonhumans. In D. R. Shanks, K. Holyoak, & D. L. Medin. The psychology of learning and motivation: Causal learning (Vol. 34, pp. 89-1331). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.