Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 362

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

What does a Man do after he Makes an Error? An Analysis of Response Programming

Rabbitt, Patrick, Rodgers, Bryan·1977·Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
DOI 10.1080/14640747708400645
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

When people make errors during continuous tasks they temporarily pause and then slow down. One line of explanation has been that they monitor feedback to detect errors, that they may make incidental responses when errors occur (e.g. they may swear) and that they may pause to analyse their errors. In all these cases they may be assumed to act as single channel information processing systems of limited capacity, and to be unable to recognise any new signal until these processes have been completed. Analysis of response after errors shows that this cannot be the case. Responses after errors are inaccurate, but are not slow when they require the subject to make the response which he should have made on the previous trial (i.e. to make an error correction response). Subjects thus must recognise new signals as soon as they occur. The present results require a new model of error detection and correction, and a model for response programming and priming.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14640747708400645

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Rabbitt, P., & Rodgers, B.
Venue
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1977-11
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
727-743
ISSN
0033-555X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1080/14640747708400645
OpenAlex
W1982805224
Cited by
362
References
0
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.