↓ Skip to main content

Practice and Preparation Time Facilitate System-Switching in Perceptual Categorization

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Practice and Preparation Time Facilitate System-Switching in Perceptual Categorization
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01964
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sébastien Hélie

Abstract

Mounting evidence suggests that category learning is achieved using different psychological and biological systems. While existing multiple-system theories and models of categorization may disagree about the number or nature of the different systems, all assume that people can switch between systems seamlessly. However, little empirical data has been collected to test this assumption, and recent available data suggest that system-switching is difficult. The main goal of this article is to identify factors influencing the proportion of participants who successfully learn to switch between procedural and declarative systems on a trial-by-trial basis. Specifically, we tested the effects of preparation time and practice, two factors that have been useful in task-switching, in a system-switching experiment. The results suggest that practice and preparation time can be beneficial to system-switching (as calculated by a higher proportion of switchers and lower switch costs), especially when they are jointly present. However, this improved system-switching comes at the cost of a larger button-switch interference when changing the location of the response buttons. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of these findings for empirical research on system-switching and theoretical work on multiple-systems of category learning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 4%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 2%
Student > Postgraduate 1 2%
Student > Bachelor 1 2%
Unknown 52 91%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 3 5%
Neuroscience 1 2%
Engineering 1 2%
Unknown 52 91%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 November 2017.
All research outputs
#18,574,814
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,476
of 30,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,895
of 331,348 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#518
of 620 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,348 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 620 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.