Results from human causal learning tasks that employ multiple cues are often interpreted in terms of the elemental theory of Rescorla and Wagner (1972). However, most results can also be successfully interpreted by the configural model proposed by Pearce (1987, 1994). One method of discriminating between these alternatives is through an investigation of summation and overexpectation. Indeed, demonstrations of these phenomena are fundamental to an elemental approach but are generally incompatible with an account that involves configural processing. Using a procedure in which the magnitude of the outcome varied, evidence for both summation and overexpectation was obtained in two experiments.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlaisdellA. P.DennistonJ. C.MillerR. R. (2001). Recovery from the overexpectation effect: Contrasting performance-focused and acquisition-focused models of retrospective revaluation.Animal Learning & Behavior29, 367–380.
2.
BourneM. J. (1990). Compound conditioning of separately pretrained conditioned stimuli evoking dissimilar conditioned responses.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society28, 451–454.
3.
BrandonS. E.VogelE. H.WagnerA. R. (2000). A componential view of configural cues in generalization and discrimination in Pavlovian conditioning.Behavioural Brain Research110, 67–72.
4.
De HouwerJ.BeckersT.GlautierS. (2002). Outcome and cue properties modulate blocking.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology55A, 965–985.
5.
GanesanR.PearceJ. M. (1988). Interactions between conditioned stimuli for food and water in the rat.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40B229–241.
6.
KehoeE. J. (1986). Summation and configuration in conditioning of the rabbit's nicitating membrane response to compound stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes12, 186–195.
7.
KehoeE. J.WhiteN. E. (2004). Overexpectation: Response loss during sustained stimulus compounding in the rabbit nicitating membrane preparation.Learning & Memory11, 476–483.
8.
KremerE. F. (1978). The Rescorla–Wagner theory: Losses in associative strength in compound conditioned stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes4, 22–36.
9.
LattalK. M.NakajimaS. (1998). Overexpectation in appetitive Pavlovian and instrumental conditioning.Animal Learning & Behavior26, 351–360.
10.
LovibondP. F.BeenS.-L.MitchellC. J.BoutonM. E.FrohardtR. (2003). Forward and backward blocking of causal judgment is enhanced by additivity of effect magnitude.Memory & Cognition31, 133–142.
11.
McLarenI. P. L.MackintoshN. J. (2002). Associative learning and elemental representation: II. Generalization and discrimination.Animal Learning & Behavior30, 177–200.
12.
PearceJ. M. (1987). A model for stimulus generalization in Pavlovian conditioning.Psychological Review94, 61–73.
13.
PearceJ. M. (1994). Similarity and discrimination: A selective review and a connectionist model.Psychological Review101, 587–607.
14.
PearceJ. M. (2002). Evaluation and development of a connectionist theory of configural learning.Animal Learning & Behavior30, 73–95.
15.
PearceJ. M.AydinA.RedheadE. S. (1997). Configural analysis of summation in autoshaping.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes23, 84–94.
16.
PearceJ. M.GeorgeD. N.AydinA. (2002). Summation: Further assessment of a configural theory.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55B61–73.
17.
PeralesJ. C.CatenaA.ShanksD. R.GonzálezJ. A. (2005). Dissociation between judgments and outcome-expectancy measures in covariation learning: A signal detection theory approach.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition31, 1105–1120.
18.
RescorlaR. A. (1997). Summation: Assessment of a configural theory.Animal Learning & Behavior25, 200–209.
19.
RescorlaR. A. (1999). Summation and overexpectation with qualitatively different outcomes.Animal Learning & Behavior27, 50–62.
20.
RescorlaR. A.WagnerA. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement.Classical conditioning II: Current theory and research.BlackA. H.ProkasyW. F.New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts64–99).
21.
ShanksD. R.CharlesD.DarbyR. J.AzmiA. (1998). Configural processes in human associative learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition24, 1353–1378.
22.
WilliamsD. A.BrakerD. S. (1999). Influence of past experience on the coding of compound stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes25, 461–474.
23.
WilliamsD. A.SagnessK. E.McPheeJ. E. (1994). Configural and elemental strategies in predictive learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition20, 694–709.
