How effective are different types of feedback in helping us to learn multiple contingencies? This article attempts to resolve a paradox whereby, in comparison to simple outcome feedback, additional feedback either fails to enhance or is actually detrimental to performance in nonmetric multiple-cue probability learning (MCPL), while in contrast the majority of studies of metric MCPL reveal improvements at least with some forms of feedback. In three experiments we demonstrate that if feedback assists participants to infer cue polarity then it can in fact be effective in nonmetric MCPL. Participants appeared to use cue polarity information to adopt a linear judgement strategy, even though the environment was nonlinear. The results reconcile the paradoxical contrast between metric and nonmetric MCPL and support previous findings of people's tendency to assume linearity and additivity in probabilistic cue learning.
AdelmanL. (1981). The influence of formal, substantive, and contextual task properties on the relative effectiveness of different forms of feedback in multiple-cue probability learning tasks.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance27, 423–442.
2.
AshbyF. G.Alfonso-ReeseL. A.TurkenA. U.WaldronE. M. (1998). A neuropsychological theory of multiple-systems in category learning.Psychological Review105, 442–481.
3.
AshbyF. G.MaddoxW. T.BohlC. J. (2002). Observational versus feedback training in rule-based and information-integration category learning.Memory & Cognition30, 666–677.
4.
BalzerW. K.DohertyM. E.O'ConnorR. (1989). Effects of cognitive feedback on performance.Psychological Bulletin106, 410–433.
5.
BrehmerB. (1979). Preliminaries to a psychology of inference.Scandinavian Journal of Psychology20, 193–210.
6.
BrehmerB. (1980). In one word: Not from experience.Acta Psychologica45, 223–241.
7.
BrehmerB. (1987). Note on subjects’ hypotheses in multiple-cue probability learning.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes40, 323–329.
8.
BrehmerB. (1994). The psychology of linear judgment models.Acta Psychologica87, 137–154.
9.
CastellanN. J. (1973). Multiple-cue probability learning with irrelevant cues.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance9, 16–29.
10.
CastellanN. J. (1974). The effect of different types of feedback in multiple-cue probability learning.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance11, 44–64.
11.
CastellanN. J.EdgellS. E. (1973). An hypothesis generation model for judgment in nonmetric multiple-cue probability learning.Journal of Mathematical Psychology10, 204–222.
12.
CastellanN. J.SwaineM. (1977). Long term feedback and differential feedback effects in nonmetric multiple-cue probability learning.Behavioral Sciences22, 116–128.
13.
DeaneD. H.HammondK. R.SummersD. A. (1972). Acquisition and application of knowledge in complex inference tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology92, 20–26.
14.
EdgellS. E.MorrisseyJ. M. (1992). Separable and unitary stimuli in nonmetric multiple cue probability learning.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes51, 118–132.
15.
GigerenzerG.ToddP. M. (1999). the ABC Research GroupSimple heuristics that make us smartNew York: Oxford University Press.
16.
GluckM. A.ShohamyD.MyersC. (2002). How do people solve the “weather prediction” task? Individual variability in strategies for probabilistic category learning.Learning & Memory9, 408–418.
17.
HammondK. R. (1971). Computer graphics as an aid to learning.Science172, 901–908.
18.
HammondK. R.BoyleP. J. R. (1971). Quasi-rationality, quarrels and new conceptions of feedback.Bulletin of the British Psychological Society24, 103–113.
19.
HarriesC.HarveyN. (2000). Taking advice, using information and knowing what you are doing.Acta Psychologica104, 399–416.
20.
JuslinP.JonesS.OlssonH.WinmanA. (2003a). Cue abstraction and exemplar memory in categorization.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition29, 924–941.
21.
JuslinP.KarlssonL.OlssonH. (2008). Information integration in multiple cue judgment: A division of labor hypothesis.Cognition106, 259–298.
22.
JuslinP.OlssonH.OlssonA.-C. (2003b). Exemplar effects in categorization and multiple-cue judgment.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General132, 133–156.
23.
KlaymanJ. (1988). On the how and why (not) of learning from outcomes.Human judgment: The SJT view. BrehmerB.JoyceC. R. B.North-Holland: Elsevier115–160).
24.
KlugerA. N.DeNisiA. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.Psychological Bulletin119, 254–284.
25.
LagnadoD. A.NewellB. R.KahanS.ShanksD. R. (2006). Insight and strategy in multiple cue learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General135, 162–183.
26.
LindellM. K.StewartT. R. (1974). The effects of redundancy in multiple cue probability learning.American Psychologist87, 393–398.
27.
MeeterM.RadicsG.MyersC. E.GluckM. A.HopkinsR. O. (2008). Probabilistic categorization: How do normal participants and amnesic patients do it?.Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews32, 237–248.
28.
MuchinskyP. M.DudychaA. L. (1975). Human inference behavior in abstract and meaningful environments.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance13, 377–391.
29.
NewellB. R.LagnadoD. A.ShanksD. R. (2007). Challenging the role of implicit processes in probabilistic category learning.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review14, 505–511.
30.
NosofskyR. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification–categorization relationship.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General115, 39–57.
31.
NosofskyR. M.BergertF. B. (2007). Limitations of exemplar models of multi-attribute probabilistic inference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition33, 999–1019.
32.
OlssonA. C.EnkvistT.JuslinP. (2006). Go with the flow: How to master a nonlinear multiple-cue judgment task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition32, 1371–1384.
33.
SchmittN.CoyleB. W.KingL. (1976). Feedback and task predictability as determinants of performance in multiple-cue probability learning tasks.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance16, 388–402.
34.
SchmittN.CoyleB. W.SaariB. B. (1977). Types of task information feedback in multiple-cue probability learning.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance18, 316–328.
35.
SchmittN.DudychaA. (1975). A reevaluation of the effect of cue redundancy in multiple-cue probability learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory1, 307–315.
36.
ShanksD. R.TunneyR. J.McCarthyJ. D. (2002). A re-examination of probability matching and rational choice.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making15, 233–250.
37.
SlovicP. (1974). Hypothesis testing in the learning of positive and negative linear functions.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes11, 368–376.
38.
SniezekJ. (1986). The role of variable labels in cue probability learning tasks.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes38, 141–161.
39.
SpeekenbrinkM.ChannonS.ShanksD. R. (2008). Learning strategies in amnesia.Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews32, 292–310.
40.
ToddP. M.HammondK. R. (1965). Differential effects of feedback in two multiple-cue probability learning tasks.Behavioral Science10, 429–435.
41.
WhiteC. M.KoehlerD. J. (2007). Choice strategies in multiple-cue probability learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition33, 757–768.
42.
YatesJ. F. (1990). Judgment and decision makingEnglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
