Keywords
associability
associative history
predictive accuracy
length of training
How to Cite
Abstract
Previous studies in human causal learning have demonstrated that the predictive history of the stimuli influences their associability (i.e., readiness with which they enter into associations subsequently). Participants receive initial training in which they can learn that half of the cues are accurate predictors of their outcomes, and the other half are poorer predictors (Stage 1). Subsequently, all cues are equally predictive of a new outcome (Stage 2). On test, participants rate the likelihood that the cues would produce Stage 2 outcomes. It has been consistently found that participants rate the cues that were accurate predictors in Stage 1 higher than poorer predictors. A new experiment is reported demonstrating that a reduction of the length of Stage 1 training does not affect the magnitude of this predictive accuracy effect. This finding is inconsistent with the notion that the effect is a consequence of changes in the associability of the cues on Stage 1. An alternative interpretation of the effect in terms of learning and generalization of performance rules of is considered.
Hall, G., & Pearce, J. M. (1979). Latent inhibition of a CS during CS-US pairings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 5, 31-42.
Hall, G., & Rodriguez, G. (2010). Attentional learning. In C. Mitchell, & M. E. Le Pelley (Eds.), Attention and learning (pp. 41-70). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Le Pelley, M. E., & McLaren, I. P. L. (2003). Learned associability and associative change in human causal learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56B, 68-79.
Le Pelley, M. E., Mitchell, C. J., Beesley, T., George, D. N., & Wills, A. J. (2016). Attention and associative learning in humans: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin & Review, 142(10), 1111-1140.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276-298.
Masson, M. E. (2011). A tutorial on a practical Bayesian alternative to null-hypothesis significance testing. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 679-690.
Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological methodology, 25, 111-163.
Sutherland, N. S., & Mackintosh, N. J. (1971). Mechanisms of animal discrimination learning. New York: Academic Press.
Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2007). A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 779-804.
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights. Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.