Edmunds, C.E.R., Inkster, A.B., Jones, P.M., Milton, F. and Wills, A.J. (2020). Absence of cross-modality analogical transfer in perceptual categorization. Open Journal of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, 1, 3-13. https://doi.org/10.46221/ojepn.2020.8639. First published: 7 August 2020.
Analogical transfer has been previously reported to occur between rule-based, but not information-integration, perceptual category structures (Casale, Roeder, & Ashby, 2012). The current study investigated whether a similar pattern of results would be observed in cross-modality transfer. Participants were trained on either a rule-based structure, or an information-integration structure, using visual stimuli. They were then tested on auditory stimuli that had the same underlying abstract category structure. Transfer performance was assessed relative to a control group who did not receive training on the visual stimuli. No cross-modality transfer was found, irrespective of the category structure employed.
Keywords: analogical reasoning, generalisation, strategies, learning, multiple systems
Spicer, S.G., Wills, A.J., Jones, P.M., Mitchell, C.J. and Dome, L. (2021). Representing uncertainty in the Rescorla-Wagner model: Blocking, the redundancy effect, and outcome base rate. Open Journal of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, 1, 14-21. https://doi.org/10.46221/ojepn.2021.6623 First published: 17 March 2021.
It is generally assumed that the Rescorla and Wagner (1972) model adequately accommodates the full results of simple cue competition experiments in humans (e.g. Dickinson et al., 1984), while the Bush and Mosteller (1951) model cannot. We present simulations that demonstrate this assumption is wrong in at least some circumstances. The Rescorla-Wagner model, as usually applied, fits the full results of a simple forward cue-competition experiment no better than the Bush-Mosteller model. Additionally, we present a novel finding, where letting the associative strength of all cues start at an intermediate value (rather than zero), allows this modified model to provide a better account of the experimental data than the (equivalently modified) Bush-Mosteller model. This modification also allows the Rescorla-Wagner model to account for a redundancy effect experiment (Uengoer et al., 2013); something that the unmodified model is not able to do. Furthermore, the modified Rescorla-Wagner model can accommodate the effect of varying the proportion of trials on which the outcome occurs (i.e. the base rate) on the redundancy effect (Jones et al., 2019). Interestingly, the initial associative strength of cues varies in line with the outcome base rate. We propose that this modification provides a simple way of mathematically representing uncertainty about the causal status of novel cues within the confines of the Rescorla-Wagner model. The theoretical implications of this modification are discussed. We also briefly introduce free and open resources to support formal modelling in associative learning.
Keywords: associative learning, prediction error, uncertainty, modelling, blocking, redundancy effect, open science.
Plymouth University bursaries
The Cognition Institute, part of Plymouth University, U.K., has sponsored 10 full bursaries for postgrads and post-docs at the university, to cover the full Article Processing Charge at OJEPN. The bursaries may also extend to staff members of the university if they do not have access to other funds. These bursaries are administered by OJEPN on behalf of the university. They are allocated at point of paper acceptance, on a first-come, first-served basis.
Edmunds, C.E.R., Inkster, A.B., Jones, P.M., Milton, F. and Wills, A.J. (2020). Absence of cross-modality analogical transfer in perceptual categorization. (PDF)
Spicer, S.G., Wills, A.J., Jones, P.M., Mitchell, C.J. and Dome, L. (2021). Representing uncertainty in the Rescorla-Wagner model: Blocking, the redundancy effect, and outcome base rate. (PDF)
Submit an article
Overleaf provides a convenient web-based system for creating LaTeX documents, and you can use our overleaf template. If you are unable to use LaTeX format, you may submit using the following template (click link and then click 'Download') for LibreOffice, a free and open-source alternative to Microsoft Word. The LibreOffice template also works with recent versions of Microsoft Word (tested with Word Office 365).
Use one of these two templates to prepare your article. When you are ready to submit, save a PDF version of your article, and send just that version to us in the first instance. We will request your original files if the paper is accepted.
Author processing charge
We'll never charge more to publish your article than it takes to cover our running costs. Our APC is currently £300, payable on acceptance of your article. If your paper is not in LaTeX format, and contains more than one simple equation, or more than one simple Table, you may be charged an additional fee for typesetting prior to publication. This fee is currently £100. Thanks to our sponsors, there is some funding you might be able to apply for to cover the APC.
We strongly encourage (but do not require) authors to upload a preprint of their manuscript at the same time they submit it to OJEPN for consideration. If you do so, please include a indication that the paper is currently under review at OJEPN. We recommend the psyArXiv preprint server.
Where there are details you wish to report that will not fit within the 4000 word limit, we will consider publishing a single Supplementary Materials document alongside your main article. Supplementary Materials are for details of literature review, methods, results, and discussions, that are too lengthy for inclusion in your main article. They are not for raw data, stimulus files, or analysis scripts. We strongly encourage publication of this type of material, but request you use one of the available third-party resources for this e.g. OSF.