Amphetamine and Signal Detection

Andrzejewski, Matthew E.; Holder, Nicole

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-800212-4.00011-x

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many psychological processes can be studied within the theoretical framework of signal detection (Wickens, 2002;Wixted, 2019), including time perception (e.g., Brown et al, 1995), reinforcement learning (e.g., Dayan & Daw, 2008), recognition memory (e.g., Wixted, 2007), and perceptual learning (e.g., Gold et al, 2004). Importantly, signal detection analyses have yielded novel and interesting predictions in fields ranging from time perception and perceptual integration to reinforcement learning (Alves-Pinto et al, 2012;Andrzejewski & Holder, 2016;Balcı et al, 2011;Dayan & Daw, 2008;Gallun & Kampel, 2016;Horga & Abi-Dargham, 2019;MacMillan, 2002;McNamara & Trimmer, 2019;Ratcliff et al, 2017;Ritchie & Carlson, 2016;Wickens, 2002;Wixted, 2007Wixted, , 2019. Numerous studies have demonstrated that prior experience affects perceptual discriminations (Karim et al, 2012;Kim et al, 2015;Meier & McGee, 1959;Odic et al, 2014), implying that the earlier experiences might affect the learning that underlies perceptual discriminations, making it surprising that signal detection models have largely been restricted to characterization of asymptotic, steady-state performance.…”

Section: Detection Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prior Experience Modifies Acquisition Trajectories Via Response-Strategy Sampling

Cw¹,

Balsam²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Signal detection as a theoretical framework has been a boon to psychological science, uniting many effects in mathematically tractable theories. Few studies, however, have considered acquisition within a signal-detection framework. The periods of acquisition and the dynamics of signal detection parameters (discriminability and criterion) are unclear, thus obscuring both the pliability and the evolution of these periods and parameters. We addressed this gap by training mice with differential prior experience in an auditory signal detection task. Briefly, naïve mice (Naïve), mice given separate experience with each of the later correct choice options (Correct Choice Response Transfer, CCRT), and mice experienced in conditional discriminations but not auditory signal detection (Conditional Discrimination Transfer, CDT) were trained to detect the presence or absence of a tone in white-noise. We found that a two-period (pre-solution and solution; see Heinemann, 1983) model of acquisition described the data well and that the pre-solution period was characterized not by several response strategies, but by a selective sampling of biased response strategies until adoption of a conditional responding strategy as mice transitioned into the solution period. Signal detection parameters reflected these dynamics: discriminability remained low until adoption of the conditional responding strategy indicating discriminability is sensitive to feedback and thus acquired; criterion took excursions reflecting selective sampling but not sensitivity to feedback. Prior experience affected the length and composition of the pre-solution period. CCRT and CDT mice had shorter pre-solution periods than naïve mice, CDT and Naïve mice developed substantial criterion biases and acquired asymptotic discriminability faster than CCRT mice. We discuss these data in terms of implications for signal detection and learning theories, proposing a modification of learning theories in which inferential processing during the pre-solution period may facilitate acquisition.

show abstract

Section: Detection Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prior Experience Modifies Acquisition Trajectories Via Response-Strategy Sampling

Cw¹,

Balsam²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many psychological processes can be studied within the theoretical framework of signal detection (Wickens, 2002;Wixted, 2019), including time perception (e.g., Brown et al, 1995), reinforcement learning (e.g., Dayan & Daw, 2008), recognition memory (e.g., Wixted, 2007), and perceptual learning (e.g., Gold et al, 2004). Importantly, signal detection analyses have yielded novel and interesting predictions in the aforementioned fields (Alves-Pinto et al, 2012;Andrzejewski & Holder, 2016;Balcı et al, 2011;Dayan & Daw, 2008;Gallun & Kampel, 2016;Horga & Abi-Dargham, 2019;MacMillan, 2002;McNamara & Trimmer, 2019;Ratcliff et al, 2017;Ritchie & Carlson, 2016;Wickens, 2002;Wixted, 2007Wixted, , 2019. Numerous studies have demonstrated that prior experience affects perceptual discriminations (Karim et al, 2012;Kim et al, 2015;Meier & McGee, 1959;Odic et al, 2014), implying that the earlier experiences might affect the learning that underlies perceptual discriminations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%