Sentence examples for misleading feedback from inspiring English sources

Computational modeling revealed that the apparent increased sensitivity to misleading feedback in the probabilistic discrimination task could be accounted for in terms of an overall reduction in reinforcement sensitivity, irrespective of affective valence.

[Note that the original BIC was expressed as BIC = LL – 0.5 k ln(n), for which the largest is the best (Schwartz 1978; Burnham and Anderson 2004).] To compare the model's predictions to the WSLS analysis taking into account the veracity of the feedback, the probabilities of "obeying" true or false (misleading) feedback were sampled from the best-fit computational model of behavior.

For false feedback, there was a highly significant effect of Lesion (F2,9 = 12.4, P = 0.003); pairwise comparisons between groups demonstrated that the amygdala-depleted groups were more likely to obey misleading feedback than controls (F1,6 = 26.1, P = 0.002) or OFC-depleted animals (F1,6 = 8.32, P = 0.028), while the OFC and control groups did not differ significantly (F1,6 = 3.76, P = 0.101).

Thus, the nature of the behavioral deficit may depend on whatever use is made of the anticipatory signal: for example to inhibit responding (conditioned suppression), to maintain a particular choice (ignoring misleading feedback, as in the probabilistic discrimination task), or to increase response vigor as a function of reward magnitude (Cools et al. 2005).

In a similar manipulation, Schwark, Sandry, Macdonald, and Dolgov (2012) attempted to increase rare target detection rates by providing misleading feedback that increased the perceived prevalence of targets.

In contrast to the above experiments in rats and humans, the present study presented a series of novel probabilistic discriminations, prior to any reversals, and analyses focused on both misleading negative and misleading positive feedback.

In contrast, both the amygdala and the PFC have been implicated in mediating the deleterious effects of misleading negative feedback in a functional imaging study of probabilistic reversal in depression (Taylor Tavares et al. 2008).

The present study demonstrates that an apparent enhanced sensitivity to misleading punishing feedback and reduced punishment-induced response suppression are both present following localized 5,7-DHT-induced depletions of 5-HT in the amygdala of nonhuman primates.

Present trends mislead, since feedback effects await.

If users do not provide feedback, rating reliability becomes misleading.

We assume feedback is reliable, although in reality it is often lacking or misleading.