Probability matching and the overlearning reversal effect

Juola, James F.; Hergenhahn, B. R.

doi:10.3758/bf03331676

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The discrepancy between the results of the present study and data presented by Juola & Hergenhahn (1967) suggests that reversals in a probabiIity learning situation for a given probability schedule may be a function of the prereversallevel of performance. That is, the eloser R 1 approaches the probability of EI during prereversal trials, the faster the reversal.…”

Section: Is2contrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Previous reports of an overtraining reversal effect were attributed to differences in prereversallevels ofperformance. Juola & Hergenhahn (1967) have recently reported finding an overtraining reversal effect in a probability learning situation. In their study, Ss were given either 25 or 50 training trials with either .90: .10, .80:.20, or .70:.30 schedules, and then 100 trials with reversed probability schedules.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The overtraining reversal effect in a probability learning situation

Yelen

1969

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated the overtraining reversal effect in a probability learning situation. Groups of 15 Ss received either 100 or 200 training trials with either .90:.10 or .75:.25 schedules, and then received 100 trials with reversed probability schedules. There were no differences between the 100 and 200 training trial groups during the reversal trials, and thus, no evidence for an overtraining reversal effect. Previous reports of an overtraining reversal effect were attributed to differences in prereversallevels ofperformance.Juola & Hergenhahn (1967) have recently reported finding an overtraining reversal effect in a probability learning situation. In their study, Ss were given either 25 or 50 training trials with either .90: .10, .80:.20, or .70:.30 schedules, and then 100 trials with reversed probability schedules. Their resuIts showed that Ss receiving 25 training trials deviated more from the expected probability levels during the reversal trials than Ss receiving 50 training trials. Since other data (e.g., Estes & Straughan, 1954) suggest, particularly for the .80: .20 and .70:.30 schedules, that the Ss would not have reached the expected probability levels with so few training trials, it is possible that littIe or no overtraining occurred in the Juola and Hergenhahn study and that the differences between their 25 and 50 training trials groups can be attributed to other factors.The present experiment investigated the overtraining reversal effect in a probability learning situation where sufficient trials were given to produce stable performance levels prior to reversal. SUBJECTS The Ss were 60 students from introductory psychology elasses at Washburn University. DESIGN Fifteen Ss were randomly assigned to each of the four groups that resulted from the factorial combination of two levels of training trials (100 and 200) with two probability schedules (.90:.10 and .75 :.25). At the completion of training, all Ss received 100 trials with reversed probability schedules (.10:.90 and .25:.75). APPARATUS The apparatus consisted of three horizontallights and two toggle switches mounted on a screen separating S and E. The center light was used as a signal for the S to guess whether the 1.00 IS2e left or right light would be tumed on. The Ss used the toggte switches mounted below the left and right lights to indicate their guesses. The onsets and offsets of the Iights were controlled by silent Hunter timers. PROCEDURE Subjects were instructed that the purpose of the experiment was to "outguess" the E as often as possible by guessing whether E would turn on the left or right light. Ss were then given either 100 or 200 training trials with either .90:.l 0 or .75:.25 schedules. A trial consisted of the presentation ofthe center light for 2 sec, during which the Ss were required to indicate their guess, followed by the presentation of either the left or right light for 2 sec. The left and right lights were presented according to sequences which reproduced the probability schedules in blocks of 20 trials. ...

show abstract

Section: Is2contrasting

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The overtraining reversal effect in a probability learning situation

Yelen

1969

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effect of overlearning on retention.

Driskell¹,

Willis²,

Copper³

1992

Journal of Applied Psychology

246

175

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The "Call for Programs" for the 1993 APA annual convention appears in the October issue of the APA Monitor. The 1993 convention will be held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, from August 20 through August 24. Deadline for submission of program and presentation proposals is December 10,1992. Additional copies of the "Call" are available from the APA Convention Office, effective in October. As a reminder, agreement to participate in the APA convention is now presumed to convey permission for the presentation to be audiotaped if selected for taping. Any speaker or participant who does not wish his or her presentation to be audiotaped must notify the person submitting the program either at the time the invitation is extended or prior to the December 10 deadline for proposal submission.

show abstract

Method for Measuring Accuracy of Probability Matching

Juola

Hergenhahn

1968

Percept Mot Skills

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probability matching and the overlearning reversal effect

Cited by 3 publications

References 5 publications

The overtraining reversal effect in a probability learning situation

The overtraining reversal effect in a probability learning situation

Effect of overlearning on retention.

Method for Measuring Accuracy of Probability Matching

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About