The effects of unidirectional versus bidirectional rating procedures on college students' judgments of response-outcome contingency

摘要: Abstract Studies of human contingency judgment often reveal substantial bias and inaccuracy in ratings cause-effect relationship. This study examined the effects different rating procedures on judgment. In two experiments, college students responded to rated a range positive, negative, zero contingencies presented free-operant format. Experiment 1 found that judgments made along unidirectional 0 100 “control” scale were less sensitive variations (especially negative ones) based sophisticated strategies than bidirectional − + “prevent-cause” scale. 2 informing subjects given their responding may either cause or prevent outcome eliminated tendency underestimate improved sophistication strategy use but did not increase sensitivity level Taken together, these results suggest contributes highly accurate unbiased response-outcome contingency.