Transfer of category learning to impoverished contexts

被引:2
作者
Whitehead, Peter S. [1 ,2 ]
Zamary, Amanda [2 ]
Marsh, Elizabeth J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Duke Univ, Ctr Cognit Neurosci, LSRC, Box 90999, Durham, NC 27708 USA
[2] Duke Univ, Dept Psychol & Neurosci, Durham, NC 27708 USA
关键词
Category learning; Transfer; Education; Interleaving; Feature descriptions; RETRIEVAL; CLASSIFICATION;
D O I
10.3758/s13423-021-02031-7
中图分类号
B841 [心理学研究方法];
学科分类号
040201 ;
摘要
Learning often happens in ideal conditions, but then must be applied in less-than-ideal conditions - such as when a learner studies clearly illustrated examples of rocks in a book but then must identify them in a muddy field. Here we examine whether the benefits of interleaving (vs. blocking) study schedules, as well as the use of feature descriptions, supports the transfer of category learning in new, impoverished contexts. Specifically, keeping the study conditions constant, we evaluated learners' ability to classify new exemplars in the same neutral context versus in impoverished contexts in which certain stimulus features are occluded. Over two experiments, we demonstrate that performance in new, impoverished contexts during test is greater for participants who received an interleaved (vs. blocked) study schedule, both for novel and for studied exemplars. Additionally, we show that this benefit extends to both a short (3-min) or long (48-h) test delay. The presence of feature descriptions during learning had no impact on transfer. Together, these results extend the growing literature investigating how changes in context during category learning or test impacts performance and provide support for the use of interleaving to promote the far transfer of category knowledge to impoverished contexts.
引用
收藏
页码:1035 / 1044
页数:10
相关论文
共 40 条
  • [1] Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder
    Anwyl-Irvine, Alexander L.
    Massonnie, Jessica
    Flitton, Adam
    Kirkham, Natasha
    Evershed, Jo K.
    [J]. BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2020, 52 (01) : 388 - 407
  • [2] When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer
    Barnett, SM
    Ceci, SJ
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2002, 128 (04) : 612 - 637
  • [3] Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4
    Bates, Douglas
    Maechler, Martin
    Bolker, Benjamin M.
    Walker, Steven C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL SOFTWARE, 2015, 67 (01): : 1 - 48
  • [4] What makes distributed practice effective?
    Benjamin, Aaron S.
    Tullis, Jonathan
    [J]. COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2010, 61 (03) : 228 - 247
  • [5] Similarity Matters: A Meta-Analysis of Interleaved Learning and Its Moderators
    Brunmair, Matthias
    Richter, Tobias
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2019, 145 (11) : 1029 - 1052
  • [6] The Sequence of Study Changes What Information Is Attended to, Encoded, and Remembered During Category Learning
    Carvalho, Paulo F.
    Goldstone, Robert L.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2017, 43 (11) : 1699 - 1719
  • [7] What you learn is more than what you see: what can sequencing effects tell us about inductive category learning?
    Carvalho, Paulo F.
    Goldstone, Robert L.
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2015, 6
  • [8] Putting category learning in order: Category structure and temporal arrangement affect the benefit of interleaved over blocked study
    Carvalho, Paulo F.
    Goldstone, Robert L.
    [J]. MEMORY & COGNITION, 2014, 42 (03) : 481 - 495
  • [9] Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis
    Cepeda, Nicholas J.
    Pashler, Harold
    Vul, Edward
    Wixted, John T.
    Rohrer, Doug
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2006, 132 (03) : 354 - 380
  • [10] The origin of the interaction between learning method and delay in the testing effect: The roles of processing and conceptual retrieval organization
    Congleton, Adam
    Rajaram, Suparna
    [J]. MEMORY & COGNITION, 2012, 40 (04) : 528 - 539