Contiception: A program to study the effects of contingency parameters on judgments of control

Little is known about the heuristics people use in evaluating the degree to which they control events. The DOS-basedContiception program allows users to independently set the extent to which subjects’ actions are necessary and sufficient (the two components of contingency) to cause a change in an animated display. Up to four subject actions (keypresses) can each cause up to four dimensions of the display to change according to independently set contingencies. The task within which subjects judge their control involves interacting with the display in real time. To facilitate modeling of the possible algorithms used by different groups of subjects or under different conditions, the program provides several calculations of contingency magnitude and algebraic rules upon which the literature suggests subjects might base their control judgments. The program also allows sessions (trial sequences) to be saved and provides raw and summarized data output.

[1]  V. Benassi,et al.  Contingency judgments by depressed college students: sadder but not always wiser. , 1985, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  D R Shanks,et al.  Continuous monitoring of human contingency judgment across trials , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[3]  J. Watson.  Smiling, cooing, and "the game." , 1972 .

[4]  D. Symons,et al.  Responsiveness and dependency are different aspects of social contingencies: An example from mother and infant smiles , 1994 .

[5]  J. Wright.  Consistency and complexity of response sequences as a function of schedules of noncontingent reward. , 1962, Journal of experimental psychology.

[6]  E. Langer.  The illusion of control. , 1975 .

[7]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  The effect of representations of binary variables on judgment of influence , 1983 .

[8]  Mairi Fuller,et al.  Judgements of control over a contingently responsive animation by students with and without learning disabilities , 1995 .

[9]  E. Wasserman.  Detecting Response-Outcome Relations: Toward an Understanding of the Causal Texture of the Environment , 1990 .

[10]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  JUDGMENT OF CONTINGENCY BETWEEN RESPONSES AND OUTCOMES. , 1965, Psychological monographs.

[11]  C. Wortman,et al.  Some determinants of perceived control. , 1975 .

[12]  L. Allan.  A note on measurement of contingency between two binary variables in judgment tasks , 1980 .

[13]  L. Abramson,et al.  Judgment of contingency in depressed and nondepressed students: sadder but wiser? , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. General.