Semisupervised category learning: The impact of feedback in learning the information-integration task

In a standard supervised classification paradigm, stimuli are presented sequentially, participants make a classification, and feedback follows immediately. In this article, we use a semisupervised classification paradigm, in which feedback is given after a prespecified percentage of trials only. In Experiment 1, feedback was given in 100%, 0%, 25%, and 50% of the trials. Previous research reported by Ashby, Queller, and Berretty (1999) indicated that in an information-integration task, perfect accuracy was obtained supervised (100%) but not unsupervised (0%). Our results show that in both the 100% and 50% conditions, participants were able to achieve maximum accuracy. However, in the 0% and the 25% conditions, participants failed to learn. To discover the influence of the no-feedback trials on the learning process, the 50% condition was replicated in Experiment 2, substituting unrelated filler trials for the no-feedback trials. The results indicated that accuracy rates were similar, suggesting no impact of the no-feedback trials on the learning process. The possibility of ever learning in a 25% setting was also researched in Experiment 2. Using twice as many trials, the results showed that all but 2 participants succeeded, suggesting that only the total number of feedback trials is important. The impact of the semisupervised learning results for ALCOVE, COVIS, and SPEED models is discussed.In a standard supervised classification paradigm, stimuli are presented sequentially, participants make a classification, and feedback follows immediately. In this article, we use a semisupervised classification paradigm, in which feedback is given after a prespecified percentage of trials only. In Experiment 1, feedback was given in 100%, 0%, 25%, and 50% of the trials. Previous research reported by Ashby, Queller, and Berretty (1999) indicated that in an information-integration task, perfect accuracy was obtained supervised (100%) but not unsupervised (0%). Our results show that in both the 100% and 50% conditions, participants were able to achieve maximum accuracy. However, in the 0% and the 25% conditions, participants failed to learn. To discover the influence of the no-feedback trials on the learning process, the 50% condition was replicated in Experiment 2, substituting unrelated filler trials for the no-feedback trials. The results indicated that accuracy rates were similar, suggesting no impact of the no-feedback trials on the learning process. The possibility of ever learning in a 25% setting was also researched in Experiment 2. Using twice as many trials, the results showed that all but 2 participants succeeded, suggesting that only the total number of feedback trials is important. The impact of the semisupervised learning results for ALCOVE, COVIS, and SPEED models is discussed.A