Learning from Missing Feedback: Exemplar versus Model-Based Methods
Saved in:
| Title: | Learning from Missing Feedback: Exemplar versus Model-Based Methods |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Jerker Denrell, Adam N. Sanborn, Jake Spicer (ORCID |
| Source: | Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2025 51(7):1048-1080. |
| Availability: | American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 33 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Feedback (Response), Bias, Methods, Models, Adults, Decision Making |
| DOI: | 10.1037/xlm0001416 |
| ISSN: | 0278-7393 1939-1285 |
| Abstract: | In many real-life settings, feedback is only available for cases that decision makers accept and so may be biased toward positive events. How do people learn to distinguish good from bad alternatives from such selective feedback, and can they correct for this bias? We describe the computational problems of classification learning from biased samples and examine how exemplar and model-based methods can deal with this challenge: Model-based methods can adjust their representation of the task based on what information is available while exemplar models can impute fictive negative outcomes in missing cases to avoid positivistic biases. Importantly, these methods imply distinct assumptions about the task and reactions to missing feedback, which can be assessed empirically. In three experiments, we test whether participants rely on imputation or use a Bayesian model of the task to correct for selection bias. We find that many participants were best described by an exemplar model, most with imputation, but an almost equal proportion was best described by a Bayesian model. People best described by different models reacted somewhat differently to missing feedback. We also observe substantial stability in whether individuals were best described by model-based or exemplar models across tasks, though participants were more likely to use exemplar models when there was greater uncertainty about the task structure. Overall, our findings show that people deal with missing feedback in an adaptive manner by adopting diverse approaches that are partially stable and partially reflect assumptions made about the experimental context. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Notes: | https://osf.io/hfmzy/?view_only=8e1dad4b2c8b4ac1a08900454e75ffc2 |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1508756 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1508756 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Learning from Missing Feedback: Exemplar versus Model-Based Methods – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jerker+Denrell%22">Jerker Denrell</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Adam+N%2E+Sanborn%22">Adam N. Sanborn</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jake+Spicer%22">Jake Spicer</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9531-6216">0000-0001-9531-6216</externalLink>) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Experimental+Psychology%3A+Learning%2C+Memory%2C+and+Cognition%22"><i>Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition</i></searchLink>. 2025 51(7):1048-1080. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 33 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Feedback+%28Response%29%22">Feedback (Response)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Bias%22">Bias</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Methods%22">Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Models%22">Models</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adults%22">Adults</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Decision+Making%22">Decision Making</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1037/xlm0001416 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0278-7393<br />1939-1285 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: In many real-life settings, feedback is only available for cases that decision makers accept and so may be biased toward positive events. How do people learn to distinguish good from bad alternatives from such selective feedback, and can they correct for this bias? We describe the computational problems of classification learning from biased samples and examine how exemplar and model-based methods can deal with this challenge: Model-based methods can adjust their representation of the task based on what information is available while exemplar models can impute fictive negative outcomes in missing cases to avoid positivistic biases. Importantly, these methods imply distinct assumptions about the task and reactions to missing feedback, which can be assessed empirically. In three experiments, we test whether participants rely on imputation or use a Bayesian model of the task to correct for selection bias. We find that many participants were best described by an exemplar model, most with imputation, but an almost equal proportion was best described by a Bayesian model. People best described by different models reacted somewhat differently to missing feedback. We also observe substantial stability in whether individuals were best described by model-based or exemplar models across tasks, though participants were more likely to use exemplar models when there was greater uncertainty about the task structure. Overall, our findings show that people deal with missing feedback in an adaptive manner by adopting diverse approaches that are partially stable and partially reflect assumptions made about the experimental context. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: Note Label: Notes Group: Note Data: https://osf.io/hfmzy/?view_only=8e1dad4b2c8b4ac1a08900454e75ffc2 – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2026 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1508756 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1508756 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1037/xlm0001416 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 33 StartPage: 1048 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Feedback (Response) Type: general – SubjectFull: Bias Type: general – SubjectFull: Methods Type: general – SubjectFull: Models Type: general – SubjectFull: Adults Type: general – SubjectFull: Decision Making Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Learning from Missing Feedback: Exemplar versus Model-Based Methods Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Jerker Denrell – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Adam N. Sanborn – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Jake Spicer IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 07 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0278-7393 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1939-1285 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 51 – Type: issue Value: 7 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
