Sequential effects reflect parallel learning of multiple environmental regularities

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 22 - Proceedings of the 2009 Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 2053-2061

  Wilder, Matthew H ^a   Jones, Matt ^b   Mozer, Michael C ^a  

^a University of Colorado at Boulder   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHANGING ENVIRONMENT; COGNITIVE TASK; INTERNAL REPRESENTATION; PARALLEL LEARNING; SECOND ORDER STATISTICS; SEQUENCE REPETITION; SEQUENTIAL EFFECTS; SIMPLE++; STATISTICAL STRUCTURES; TWO-ALTERNATIVE FORCED CHOICE TASKS;

ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY;

EID: 80054976453     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (15)

1. M. Jones and W. Sieck. Learning myopia: An adaptive recency effect in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29:626-640, 2003.
2. M. Mozer, S. Kinoshita, and M. Shettel. Sequential dependencies offer insight into cognitive control. In W. Gray, editor, Integrated Models of Cognitive Systems, pages 180-193. Oxford University Press, 2007.
3. A. Yu and J. Cohen. Sequential effects: Superstition or rational behavior? NIPS, pages 1873-1880, 2008.
4. L. Maloney, M. Dal Martello, C. Sahm, and L. Spillmann. Past trials influence perception of ambiguous motion quartets through pattern completion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102:3164-3169, 2005.
5. I. Jentzsch and W. Sommer. Functional localization and mechanisms of sequential effects in serial reaction time tasks. Perception and Psychophysics, 64(7):1169-1188, 2002.
6. D. Hale. Sequential effects in a two-choice reaction task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 19:133-141, 1967.
7. E. Soetens, L. Boer, and J. Hueting. Expectancy or automatic facilitation? separating sequential effects in two-choice reaction time. Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 11:598-616, 1985.
8. R. Cho, L. Nystrom, E. Brown, A. Jones, T. Braver, P. Holmes, and J. Cohen. Mechanisms underlying dependencies of performance on stimulus history in a two-alternative forced-choice task. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 4:283-299, 2002.
9. W. Estes. Toward a statistical theory of learning. Psychological Review, 57:94-107, 1950.
10. N. Anderson. Effect of first-order conditional probability in a two-choice learning situation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(2):73-83, 1960.
11. D. Laming. Subjective probability in choice-reaction experiments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 6:81-120, 1969.
12. J. Raymond, K. Shapiro, and K. Arnell. Temporary suppression of visual processing in an rsvp task: an attentional blink? Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 18:849-860, 1992.
13. M. Posner and Y. Cohen. Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma and D. G. Bouwhuis, editors, Attention and Performance X: Control of language processes, pages 531-556. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1984.
14. N. Kanwisher. Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token individuation. Cognition, 27: 117-143, 1987.
15. J. Jahnke. The ranschburg effect. Psychological Review, 76:592-605, 1969.