The effect of different types of feedback in multiple-cue probability learning

Abstract The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of different sorts of feedback upon performance in a multiple-cue probability learning task with binary cues and binary events. In addition to traditional outcome feedback, subjects were given periodic feedback messages throughout the experiment. Different types of feedback included percentage of correct responses, cue-event validity coefficients, cue-response utilization coefficients, and a combination of both of the last two types. Feedback was based upon either all previous trials (long-term feedback) or the last 20 trials (short-term feedback) or both. Two different tasks were used. Nine hundred seventy-two subjects were assigned to 32 groups in a 4 (feedback type) by 2 (short-term feedback) by 2 (long-term feedback) by 2 (task) design, and were individually run for 300 noncontingent trials. In general, the results were that no type of feedback enhanced performance, but all feedback types except percentage correct feedback resulted in a decrement in performance. Long-term and short-term feedback interaction effects were found.

[1]  M. Fiorina.  A note on probability matching and rational choice , 1971 .

[2]  N. Castellan.  Effect of change of payoff in probability learning. , 1969 .

[3]  N. Castellan.  Determination of joint distributions from marginal distributions in dichotomous systems , 1970 .

[4]  J. C. Naylor,et al.  Intuitive inference strategies in interval learning tasks as a function of validity magnitude and sign , 1968 .

[5]  Kenneth R. Hammond,et al.  Quasi-rationality, quarrels and new conceptions of feedback. , 1971 .

[6]  K R Hammond,et al.  Differential feedback in two multiple-cue probability learning tasks. , 1965, Behavioral science.

[7]  N. Castellan,et al.  An hypothesis generation model for judgment in nonmetric multiple-cue probability learning , 1973 .

[8]  Berndt Brehmer,et al.  The relation between cue dependency and cue validity in single-cue probability learning with scaled cue and criterion variables , 1970 .

[9]  N. Castellan.  Multiple-cue probability learning with irrelevant cues☆ , 1973 .

[10]  K R Hammond,et al.  Inference behavior in multiple-cue tasks involving both linear and nonlinear relations. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[11]  Mats Björkman,et al.  Stimulus—event learning and event learning as concurrent processes , 1967 .

[12]  M. Björkman.  FEEDFORWARD AND FEEDBACK AS DETERMINERS OF KNOWLEDGE AND POLICY: NOTES ON A NEGLECTED ISSUE , 1972 .

[13]  M. Björkman,et al.  INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCES IN A SINGLE‐CUE PROBABILITY LEARNING TASK , 1969 .

[14]  N. Castellan,et al.  Configural effect in multiple-cue probability learning , 1973 .

[15]  K R Hammond,et al.  Computer Graphics as an Aid to Learning , 1971, Science.

[16]  J. C. Naylor,et al.  Characteristics of the human inference process in complex choice behavior situations , 1966 .

[17]  J. C. Naylor,et al.  The influence of cue redundancy upon the human inference process for tasks of varying degrees of predictability , 1968 .