Abstract
Experiments examined the effect of a stimulus filling a response-outcome delay on human judgments of causal effectiveness. In Experiment 1, subjects rated the effectiveness of 2 concurrently available responses. One response led to the outcome with a 75% probability, the other never led to the outcome. Ratings were higher for the former compared to the latter key, and for immediate compared to delayed outcomes. A signal presented during the delay ameliorated this deficit. Experiments 2 and 3 examined conditioned reinforcement and perceptual catalysis accounts of this effect. In both experiments, 50% of responses on each of 2 keys led to an outcome. Ratings were high, relative to an unsignaled condition, when a stimulus filled the outcome delay, and when the same stimulus followed the response but did not precede the outcome. This result is not consistent with the operation of perceptual catalysis and was shown to be the result of secondary-reinforcement-like processes rather than outcome-confusion or generalization between responses (Experiments 3, 4).
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.