Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T16:26:28.378Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Cognitive Probability Model for Learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

John E. Overall
John E. Overall*
Affiliation:
Veterans Administration and Johns Hopkins University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A quantitative model for the behavior of albino rats in choice-making situations is presented. The model, which is based upon a cognitive conceptualization of the learning process, is shown to yield predictions which are equivalent to those produced by the linear operator stochastic models at the asymptotic limit but which differ from these during early trials in the learning situation.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , June 1960 , pp. 159 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © 1960 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This work was done while the author was a National Science Foundation Post-doctoral Fellow in the Psychometric Laboratory of the University of North Carolina. The author is indebted to Dr. Lyle V. Jones, Director of the Psychometric Laboratory, for considerable time and effort in reading and criticizing early drafts of the manuscript. The help of Mr. Douglas K. Spiegel in criticizing an early draft is also gratefully acknowledged.

References

Brown, W. L. and Overall, J. E. Implications of recency effects for probability learning theories. J. gen. Psychol., 1959, 61, 243–251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bush, R. R. and Mosteller, F.. Stochastic models for learning, New York: Wiley, 1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estes, W. K. Individual behavior in uncertain situations: an interpretation in terms of statistical association theory. In Thrall, R. M., Coombs, C. H., Davis, R. L. (Eds.), Decision processes. New York: Wiley, 1954, 127–138.Google Scholar
Hull, C. L. Principles of behavior; an introduction to behavior theory, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1943.Google Scholar
Overall, J. E. and Brown, W. L. Recency, frequency, and probability in response prediction. Psychol. Rev., 1957, 64, 314–323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Overall, J. E. and Brown, W. L. Cognitive-postremity predictions of learning behavior. J. gen. Psychol., in press.Google Scholar
Overall, J. E. and Brown, W. L. A comparison of the decision behavior of rats and human subjects. Amer. J. Psychol., 1959, 72, 258–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H. A. A comparison of game theory and learning theory. Psychometrika, 1956, 21, 267–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wicker, J., Overall, J. E., and Brown, W. L. Learning of sequential response alternations by albino rats. School of Aviation Medicine, U.S.A.F., Report 58–146, 1956.Google Scholar