Feedback specificity, learning opportunities, and learning

Although increasing feedback specificity is generally beneficial for immediate performance, it can undermine certain aspects of the learning needed for later, more independent performance. The results of the present transfer experiment demonstrate that the effects of increasing feedback specificity on learning depended on what was to be learned, and these effects were partially mediated through the opportunities to learn how to respond to different task conditions during practice. More specific feedback was beneficial for learning how to respond to good performance and detrimental for learning how to respond to poor performance. The former relationship was partially mediated by feedback specificity's effect on learning opportunities during practice. The results have implications for designing feedback interventions and training to maximize the learning of various aspects of a task.     

Feedback specificity,information processing,and transfer of training

This study examines the effects of feedback specificity on transfer of training and the mechanisms through which feedback can enhance or inhibit transfer. We used concurrent verbal protocol methodology to elicit and operationalize the explicit information processing activities used by 48 trainees performing the Furniture Factory computer simulation. We hypothesized and found support for a moderated mediation model. Increasing feedback specificity influenced the exposure trainees had to different task conditions and negatively affected their levels of explicit information processing. In turn, explicit information processes and levels of exposure to different task conditions interacted to impact transfer of training. Those who received less specific feedback relied more heavily on explicit information processing and had more exposure to the challenging aspects of the task than those who received more specific feedback, which differentially affected what they learned about the task. We discuss how feedback specificity and exposure to different task conditions may prime different learning processes.     

Saccadic exploration and perceptual-motor learning

A cognitive model of perceptual-motor learning by saccadic exploration is outlined. The model proceeds from the assumption that saccades are guided by anticipating their specific retinal change (intentional control of saccades). Perceptual-motor learning by saccadic exploration is described as the process of detecting the invariance which determines the relationship between efference and reafference.     

Children balance theories and evidence in exploration, explanation, and learning

We look at the effect of evidence and prior beliefs on exploration, explanation and learning. In Experiment 1, we tested children both with and without differential prior beliefs about balance relationships (Center Theorists, mean: 82 months; Mass Theorists, mean: 89 months; No Theory children, mean: 62 months). Center and Mass Theory children who observed identical evidence explored the block differently depending on their beliefs. When the block was balanced at its geometric center (belief-violating to a Mass Theorist, but belief-consistent to a Center Theorist), Mass Theory children explored the block more, and Center Theory children showed the standard novelty preference; when the block was balanced at the center of mass, the pattern of results reversed. The No Theory children showed a novelty preference regardless of evidence. In Experiments 2 and 3, we follow-up on these findings, showing that both Mass and Center Theorists selectively and differentially appeal to auxiliary variables (e.g., a magnet) to explain evidence only when their beliefs are violated. We also show that children use the data to revise their predictions in the absence of the explanatory auxiliary variable but not in its presence. Taken together, these results suggest that children's learning is at once conservative and flexible; children integrate evidence, prior beliefs, and competing causal hypotheses in their exploration, explanation, and learning.     

Stimulus specificity in avoidance learning

The present experiments address the issue of stimulus specificity in fear and avoidance learning. First, it was established that light stimuli are effective warning signals (WS) in shuttle avoidance. Then light stimuli were shown to produce conditioned suppression in the conditioned emotional response situation comparable to that produced by noise conditioned stimuli. Finally, the effectiveness of noise onset and noise offset as feedback signals was tested. This was assessed under conditions of immediate and delayed termination of a light WS. Delayed termination of a light WS interfered with avoidance learning and the introduction of noise offset as a feedback signal enhanced it. The only demonstration of stimulus specificity was the failure of noise onset to function as a feedback signal.     

Feedback and stimulus-offset timing effects in perceptual category learning

We examined how feedback delay and stimulus offset timing affected declarative, rule-based and procedural, information–integration category-learning. We predicted that small feedback delays of several hundred milliseconds would lead to the best information–integration learning based on a highly regarded neurobiological model of learning in the striatum. In Experiment 1 information–integration learning was best with feedback delays of 500 ms compared to delays of 0 and 1000 ms. This effect was only obtained if the stimulus offset following the response. Rule-based learning was unaffected by the length of feedback delay, but was better when the stimulus was present throughout feedback than when it offset following the response. In Experiment 2 we found that a large variance (SD = 150 ms) in feedback delay times around a mean delay of 500 ms attenuated information–integration learning, but a small variance (SD = 75 ms) did not. In Experiment 3 we found that the delay between stimulus offset and feedback is more critical to information–integration learning than the delay between the response and feedback. These results demonstrate the importance of feedback timing in category-learning situations where a declarative, verbalizable rule cannot easily be used as a heuristic to classify members into their correct category.     

Goal specificity and learning with a hypermedia program

Problem solving research has found that a nonspecific goal (NSG) leads to better learning than a specific goal (SG). This effect can be understood in terms of dual-space search theories of problem solving. To apply the theory, we studied goal specificity effects with a hypermedia program in which participants had to learn about the outbreak of World War 1, either with the goal to find twenty dates (i.e., SG) or with the goal to explain the reasons for the war (i.e., NSG). As expected, compared to the SG-group, the NSG-group correctly answered more factual questions about the text during the task, spent more time on average per page, and more often looked for extra information. In a final questionnaire with factual and inferential questions, the NSG-group still performed better than the SG-group. The NSG-group may also show better transfer of what they had learnt to a new situation.     

Encoding-imagery specificity in alcohol state-dependent learning.

A free-recall procedure demonstrated state-dependent learning using alcohol. Tests of long-term memory showed that both high- and low-imagery words were less likely to be recalled if stored while intoxicated rather than under sober conditions. However, information encoded and stored while intoxicated was more effectively retrieved when later tests of recall were performed while intoxicated, as compared to recall accomplished in the sober state. This dissociative recall effect was far more robust with low-imagery than with high-imagery words.     

Orienting task specificity in incidental motor learning

The manipulation of the retention of a linear movement by means of different orienting tasks in an incidental learning paradigm was investigated. Subjects were presented with a target position followed by a different nontarget position on each of four presentation trials. After the presentation trials subjects were required to recall the target and nontarget positions. One group made verbal estimates of the distance between the target and nontarget positions, another group discriminated between the target and nontarget positions, while no verbal responses were required for a third group. The verbal-response groups, while not differing from each other, had less error at recall than the nonverbalizing group. These findings were discussed in terms of the levels of processing framework for memory research (Craik & Lockhart, 1972).     

Learning procedures and goal specificity in learning and problem-solving tasks

This experiment set out to examine the influence of two task variables (instructional procedure and goal specificity) on learning and problem-solving performance. A 2 × 2 between-subjects design was used. Twenty-four undergraduate students were asked to think aloud as they learned eight Word for Windows text editing operations, each implemented as a keyboard shortcut. Two instructional procedures were used, instructions presented either as lists or as paired statements. ''List'' groups required fewer trials than ''pairs'' groups to learn the operations, and relied more extensively upon rehearsal procedures, while ''pairs'' groups tended to use elaborative inference more frequently. Analyses of problem-solving solution times revealed no differences between the groups, although the no-goal groups tended to complete the tasks faster than the goal groups. Verbal protocols indicated that ''list'' groups tended to rely upon phonological cues to recover operation names, and made more phonological errors in recovering operation names. ''Pairs'' groups recalled more about the functions of the operations than the ''list'' groups. We conclude that different instructional procedures may lead to subtle, but important, differences in how information is encoded, represented, and recovered, and that individuals who perform to similar standards may not share the same understanding of the task in question.     

The specificity of perceptual learning in speech processing

We conducted four experiments to investigate the specificity of perceptual adjustments made to unusual speech sounds. Dutch listeners heard a female talker produce an ambiguous fricative [?] (between [f] and [s]) in [f]- or [s]-biased lexical contexts. Listeners with [f]-biased exposure (e.g., [witlo?]; from witlof, "chicory"; witlos is meaningless) subsequently categorized more sounds on an [epsilonf]-[epsilons] continuum as [f] than did listeners with [s]-biased exposure. This occurred when the continuum was based on the exposure talker's speech (Experiment 1), and when the same test fricatives appeared after vowels spoken by novel female and male talkers (Experiments 1 and 2). When the continuum was made entirely from a novel talker's speech, there was no exposure effect (Experiment 3) unless fricatives from that talker had been spliced into the exposure talker's speech during exposure (Experiment 4). We conclude that perceptual learning about idiosyncratic speech is applied at a segmental level and is, under these exposure conditions, talker specific.     

Feedback and intention during motor-skill learning: a connection with prospective memory

The intention to complete an action in the future can improve the learning of this action, but it is unknown whether this effect persists when feedback is manipulated during encoding. In Experiment 1, participants were instructed to learn a motor skill with or without intending to reproduce this learning in the future, and feedback on their movements was administrated by self-decision, that is, participants asked for feedback whenever they wanted it. The results showed that intention increased the frequency with which feedback was requested, but did not improve motor performance. In Experiment 2, participants had to learn the task with high or few feedbacks, which they could not control. In these conditions, intention was beneficial in promoting motor learning only for a low feedback schedule. We suggest that the beneficial effect of intention on learning can be overshadowed or emphasised by the feedback processing during encoding. These findings are discussed in light of theories surrounding prospective memory.     

Feedback in discriminative avoidance learning: Mechanistic versus cognitive views

Presentation of a feedback stimulus, a non-aversive event never paired with shock, following an avoidance response has been found to be an effective reinforcer in avoidance learning. Alternative formulations of the feedback effect, one a version of the traditional S-R mechanistic, two-factor theory and the other a cognitive (informational) theory, were evaluated with a view toward determining which type of formulation provides a more viable explanation of avoidance learning. The conclusion reached, however, was that both informational and fear-reduction positions operationalize their critical concepts in the same manner, and to date there are no empirical grounds for distinguishing these different views.     

Myopic regret avoidance: Feedback avoidance and learning in repeated decision making

Decision makers can become trapped by myopic regret avoidance in which rejecting feedback to avoid short-term outcome regret (regret associated with counterfactual outcome comparisons) leads to reduced learning and greater long-term regret over continuing poor decisions. In a series of laboratory experiments involving repeated choices among uncertain monetary prospects, participants primed with outcome regret tended to decline feedback, learned the task slowly or not at all, and performed poorly. This pattern was reversed when decision makers were primed with self-blame regret (regret over an unjustified decision). Further, in a final experiment in which task learning was unnecessary, feedback was more often rejected in the self-blame regret condition than in the outcome regret condition. We discuss the findings in terms of a distinction between two regret components, one associated with outcome evaluation, the other with the justifiability of the decision process used in making the choice.     

Context specificity of latent inhibition in taste aversion learning

In three experiments rats were given injections of LiCl after consuming distinctively flavoured water. The rats developed an aversion to the flavour and in all experiments the magnitude of the aversion was found to be reduced in subjects that had received pre-exposure to the flavour without aversive consequences. Experiment 1 demonstrated this pre-exposure effect to be a case of latent inhibition. The remaining experiments investigated the effects of pre-exposing the flavour in a context different from that used for conditioning. It was found (Experiment 2) diat latent inhibition transferred perfectly when the context change consisted of a move from one home cage to another. Context specificity of latent inhibition was found (Experiment 3) only when the subjects were given daily sessions in die experimental contexts, these being cages different from the home cage.