» Articles » PMID: 34858246

Strategy Development and Feedback Processing During Complex Category Learning

Overview
Journal Front Psychol
Date 2021 Dec 3
PMID 34858246
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In this study, 38 young adults participated in a probabilistic A/B prototype category learning task under observational and feedback-based conditions. The study compared learning success (testing accuracy) and strategy use (multi-cue vs. single feature vs. random pattern) between training conditions. The feedback-related negativity (FRN) and P3a event related potentials were measured to explore the relationships between feedback processing and strategy use under a probabilistic paradigm. A greater number of participants were found to utilize an optimal, multi-cue strategy following feedback-based training than observational training, adding to the body of research suggesting that feedback can influence learning approach. There was a significant interaction between training phase and strategy on FRN amplitude. Specifically, participants who used a strategy in which category membership was determined by a single feature (single feature strategy) exhibited a significant decrease in FRN amplitude from early training to late training, perhaps due to reduced utilization of feedback or reduced prediction error. There were no significant main or interaction effects between valence, training phase, or strategy on P3a amplitude. Findings are consistent with prior research suggesting that learners vary in their approach to learning and that training method influences learning. Findings also suggest that measures of feedback processing during probabilistic category learning may reflect changes in feedback utilization and may further illuminate differences among individual learners.

Citing Articles

The effect of feedback timing on category learning and feedback processing in younger and older adults.

Nunn K, Creighton R, Tilton-Bolowsky V, Arbel Y, Vallila-Rohter S Front Aging Neurosci. 2024; 16:1404128.

PMID: 38887611 PMC: 11182045. DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2024.1404128.

References
1.
Bellebaum C, Kobza S, Ferrea S, Schnitzler A, Pollok B, Sudmeyer M . Strategies in probabilistic feedback learning in Parkinson patients OFF medication. Neuroscience. 2016; 320:8-18. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.01.060. View

2.
Reed J, Squire L, Patalano A, Smith E, Jonides J . Learning about categories that are defined by object-like stimuli despite impaired declarative memory. Behav Neurosci. 1999; 113(3):411-9. DOI: 10.1037//0735-7044.113.3.411. View

3.
Hauser T, Iannaccone R, Stampfli P, Drechsler R, Brandeis D, Walitza S . The feedback-related negativity (FRN) revisited: new insights into the localization, meaning and network organization. Neuroimage. 2013; 84:159-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.028. View

4.
Larson M, Carbine K . Sample size calculations in human electrophysiology (EEG and ERP) studies: A systematic review and recommendations for increased rigor. Int J Psychophysiol. 2016; 111:33-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2016.06.015. View

5.
Gluck M, Bower G . From conditioning to category learning: an adaptive network model. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1988; 117(3):227-47. DOI: 10.1037//0096-3445.117.3.227. View