Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

How do humans learn contingencies between events? Both pathway-strengthening and inference-based process models have been proposed to explain contingency learning. We propose that each of these processes is used in different conditions. Participants viewed displays that contained single or paired objects and learned which displays were usually followed by the appearance of a dot. Some participants predicted whether the dot would appear before seeing the outcome, whereas other participants were required to respond quickly if the dot appeared shortly after the display. In the prediction task, instructions guiding participants to infer which objects caused the dot to appear were necessary in order for contingencies associated with one object to influence participants’ predictions about the object with which it had been paired. In the response task, contingencies associated with one object affected responses to its pair mate irrespective of whether or not participants were given causal instructions. Our results challenge single-mechanism accounts of contingency learning and suggest that the mechanisms underlying performance in the two tasks are distinct.

Keywords

learning reasoning cognitive processes associative processes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ashby

F. G.

Alfonso-Reese

L. A.

Turken

A. U.

Waldron

E. M.

(1998). A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. Psychological Review, 105, 442–481.

Ashby

F. G.

Maddox

W. T.

(2005). Human category learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 149–178.

Carr

A. F.

(1974). Latent inhibition and overshadowing in conditioned emotional response conditioning with rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 86, 718–723.

Cleeremans

(1993). Attention and awareness in sequence learning. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 330–335). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cleeremans

McClelland

J. L.

(1991). Learning the structure of event sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 235–253.

Cohen

J. D.

Dunbar

McClelland

J. L.

(1990). On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop task. Psychological Review, 97, 332–361.

De Houwer

(2009). The propositional approach to associative learning as an alternative for association formation models. Learning & Behavior, 37, 1–20.

De Houwer

Beckers

(2003). Secondary task difficulty modulates forward blocking in human contingency learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology B, 56, 345–357.

Gopnik

Glymour

Sobel

Schulz

Kushnir

Danks

(2004). A theory of causal learning in children: Causal maps and Bayes nets. Psychological Review, 111, 3–32.

10.

Griffiths

T. L.

Tenenbaum

J. B.

(2005). Structure and strength in causal induction. Cognitive Psychology, 51, 334–384.

11.

Kamin

L. J.

(1969). Predictability, surprise, attention, and conditioning. In Campbell

B. A.

Church

R. M.

(Eds.), Punishment and aversive behavior (pp. 279–296). New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

12.

Krechevsky

(1932). Hypotheses in rats. Psychological Review, 39, 516–532.

13.

Lovibond

P. F.

Been

Mitchell

C. J.

Bouton

M. E.

Frohardt

(2003). Forward and backward blocking of causal judgment is enhanced by additivity of effect magnitude. Memory & Cognition, 31, 133–142.

14.

Maia

T. V.

McClelland

J. L.

(2004). A reexamination of the evidence for the somatic marker hypothesis: What participants really know in the Iowa gambling task. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 101, 16075–16080.

15.

Marr

(1982). Vision: A computation investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.

16.

McClelland

J. L.

McNaughton

B. L.

O’Reilly

R. C.

(1995). Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: Insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. Psychological Review, 102, 419–457.

17.

Medin

D. L.

Schaffer

M. M.

(1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review, 85, 207–238.

18.

Melchers

K. G.

Shanks

D. R.

Lachnit

(2008). Stimulus coding in human associative learning: Flexible representations of parts and wholes. Behavioural Processes, 77, 413–427.

19.

Mitchell

C. J.

De Houwer

Lovibond

P. F.

(2009). The propositional nature of human associative learning. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 32, 183–246.

20.

Pavlov

I. P.

(1927). Conditioned reflexes. London, England: Oxford University Press.

21.

Rescorla

R. A.

Wagner

A. R.

(1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In Black

A. H.

Prokasy

W. F.

(Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current theory and research (pp. 64–69). New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

22.

Shanks

D. R.

(2010). Learning: From association to cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 273–301.

23.

Shanks

D. R.

Darby

R. J.

(1998). Feature- and rule-based generalization in human associative learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 24, 405– 415.

24.

Sobel

D. M.

Tenenbaum

J. B.

Gopnik

(2004). Children’s causal inferences from indirect evidence: Backwards blocking and Bayesian inference in preschoolers. Cognitive Science, 28, 303–333.

25.

Sun

Slusarz

Terry

(2005). The interaction of the explicit and the implicit in skill learning: A dual-process approach. Psychological Review, 112, 159–192.

26.

Tenenbaum

J. B.

Griffiths

T. L.

(2003). Theory-based causal inference. In Becker

Thrun

Obermeyer

(Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems 15 (pp. 35–42). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

27.

Tolman

E. C.

(1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55, 189–208.

28.

Waldmann

M. R.

Holyoak

K. J.

(1992). Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 222–236.

29.

Waldmann

M. R.

Holyoak

K. J.

(1997). Determining whether causal order affects cue selection in human contingency learning: Comments on Shanks and Lopez (1996). Memory & Cognition, 25, 125–134.

30.

Williams

D. A.

Sagness

K. E.

McPhee

J. E.

(1994). Configural and elemental strategies in predictive learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 694–709.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.29 MB

0.13 MB

0.06 MB

Two Mechanisms of Human Contingency Learning

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material