PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 1834767

Trial order affects cue interaction in contingency judgment.

Abstract

Recent research on contingency judgment indicates that the judged predictiveness of a cue is dependent on the predictive strengths of other cues. Two classes of models correctly predict such cue interaction: associative models and statistical models. However, these models differ in their predictions about the effect of trial order on cue interaction. In five experiments reported here, college students viewed trial-by-trial data regarding several medical symptoms and a disease, judging the predictive strength of each symptom with respect to the disease. The results indicate that trial order influences the manner in which cues interact, but that neither the associative nor the statistical models can fully account for the data pattern. A possible variation of an associative account is discussed.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G B Chapman. 1991. Trial order affects cue interaction in contingency judgment.. https://doi.org/10.1037/%2F0278-7393.17.5.837

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Rhythmic alternation and the optional complementiser in English: new evidence of phonological influence on grammatical encoding.

In a recall-based spoken production experiment, native English-speaking participants' variable use of the complementiser that to introduce the sentential complement in sentences like Henry knew (that) Lucy/Louise washed the dishes was found to be related to whether that inclusion/omission resulted in an alternating sequence of stressed and unstressed syllables between the verb of the main clause and the subject of the complement clause. This finding is discussed in relation to the question of whether and how phonological encoding can influence grammatical encoding in spoken language production.

Cues↗

Reversing the truth effect: learning the interpretation of processing fluency in judgments of truth.

Repeated statements receive higher truth ratings than new statements. Given that repetition leads to greater experienced processing fluency, the author proposes that fluency is used in truth judgments according to its ecological validity. Thus, the truth effect occurs because people learn that fluency and truth tend to be positively correlated. Three experiments tested this notion. Experiment 1 replicated the truth effect by directly manipulating processing fluency; Experiment 2 reversed the effect by manipulating the correlation between fluency and truth in a learning phase. Experiment 3 generalized this reversal by showing a transfer of a negative correlation between perceptual fluency (due to color contrast) and truth to truth judgments when fluency is due to prior exposure (i.e., repetition).

Cues↗