Connectionist theories of psychology propose that the accuracy of stimulus representations is a function of the extent to which its elements become interconnected, or associated, as a consequence of experience. To explore this idea, across three experiments, participants were required to solve a compound learned-predictiveness task, in which pairs of stimuli in each compound were established as either predictive or non-predictive of a subsequent outcome. Outcome probability was further manipulated as either probabilistic or deterministic. It was hypothesized that the propensity for one stimulus to connect with another within the compound would be greater when (a) it possessed higher relative predictive validity for an outcome and (b) was followed by an uncertain outcome relative to a deterministic outcome. Consequently, participants accuracy in recognising the conjunction of the previously exposed stimulus pairs should vary as a function of these variables. Across three experiments, which used old/new judgements following compound learned-predictiveness training, a consistent effect of predictive validity was observed – participants’ hit rate for detecting a change in the conjunction of predictive stimuli was superior to changes in the conjunction of non-predictive stimuli. However, there was no effect of outcome uncertainty. The implications of these results for theories of learning and representation are discussed.
BeesleyT.NguyenK. P.PearsonD.Le PelleyM. E. (2015). Uncertainty and predictiveness determine attention to cues during human associative learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(11), 2175–2199.
ChaoC. M.McGregorA.SandersonD. J. (2021). Uncertainty and predictiveness modulate attention in human predictive learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(6), 1177–1200.
CollinsL.PearceJ. M. (1985). Predictive accuracy and the effects of partial reinforcement on serial autoshaping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11(4), 548–564.
6.
DickinsonA. (1980). Contemporary animal learning theory (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.
7.
EasdaleL. C.Le PelleyM. E.BeesleyT. (2019). The onset of uncertainty facilitates the learning of new associations by increasing attention to cues. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72(2), 193–208.
8.
EatheringtonC. J.HaselgroveM. (2022). The role of prediction in learned predictiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition, 48(3), 203–221.
9.
ErlebacherA. (1977). Design and analysis of experiments contrasting the within-and between-subjects manipulation of the independent variable. Psychological Bulletin, 84(2), 212–219.
10.
EsberG. R.HaselgroveM. (2011). Reconciling the influence of predictiveness and uncertainty on stimulus salience: A model of attention in associative learning. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 278(1718), 2553–2561.
11.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
12.
Fei-FeiL.IyerA.KochC.PeronaP. (2007). What do we perceive in a glance of a real-world scene?Journal of Vision, 7(1), 1–29.
13.
GreenD. M.SwetsJ. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. Wiley.
14.
GreeneM. R.OlivaA. (2009). The briefest of glances: The time course of natural scene understanding. Psychological Science, 20(4), 464–472.
15.
GreenwaldA. G. (1976). Within-subjects designs: To use or not to use?Psychological Bulletin, 83(2), 314–320.
16.
HallG. (1991). Perceptual and Associative Learning. Clarendon.
17.
HebbD. O. (1949). The organization of behavior. Wiley.
18.
HogarthL.DickinsonA.AustinA.BrownC.DukaT. (2008). Attention and expectation in human predictive learning: The role of uncertainty. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(11), 1658–1668.
19.
JASP Team. (2023). JASP (Version 0.17.1) [Computer software].
20.
JuJ.ChoY. S. (2023). The modulation of value-driven attentional capture by exploration for reward information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 49(2), 181–197.
21.
KattnerF. (2015). Transfer of absolute and relative predictiveness in human contingency learning. Learning & Behavior, 43, 32–43.
22.
LagatorS.Muñiz-DiezC.BeesleyT.HaselgroveM. (2025). Mechanisms underlying the accuracy of stimulus representations: Within-event learning and outcome mediation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition, 52(1), 16–36.
23.
LarkinM. J.AitkenM. R.DickinsonA. (1998). Retrospective revaluation of causal judgments under positive and negative contingencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(6), 1331.
24.
LattalK. A.MilesA. K. (2024). Resurgence and behavioral contrast, compared and contrasted. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 47(2), 315–334.
25.
Le PelleyM. E. (2004). The role of associative history in models of associative learning: A selective review and a hybrid model. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section B, 57(3), 193–243.
26.
Le PelleyM. E.BeesleyT.GriffithsO. (2011). Overt attention and predictiveness in human contingency learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 37(2), 220–229.
27.
Le PelleyM. E.HaselgroveM.EsberG. R. (2012). Modelling attention in associative learning: Two processes or one?Learning & Behavior, 40, 292–304.
28.
Le PelleyM. E.McLarenI. P. L. (2003). Learned associability and associative change in human causal learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section B, 56(1), 68–79.
29.
Le PelleyM. E.MitchellC. J.BeesleyT.GeorgeD. N.WillsA. J. (2016). Attention and associative learning in humans: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 142(10), 1111–1140.
30.
Le PelleyM. E.SuretM. B.BeesleyT. (2009). Learned predictiveness effects in humans: A function of learning, performance, or both?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 35(3), 312–327.
31.
Le PelleyM. E.TurnbullM. N.ReimersS. J.KnipeR. L. (2010). Learned predictiveness effects following single-cue training in humans. Learning & Behavior, 38(2), 126–144.
32.
LiveseyE. J.ThorwartA.De FinaN. L.HarrisJ. A. (2011). Comparing learned predictiveness effects within and across compound discriminations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 37(4), 446–465.
33.
LochmannT.WillsA. J. (2003). Predictive history in an allergy prediction task. In SchmalhoferF.YoungR. M.KatzG. (Eds.), Proceedings of EuroCogSci 03 (pp. 217–222). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34.
LuqueD.VadilloM. A.Le PelleyM. E.BeesleyT. (2017). Prediction and uncertainty in associative learning: Examining controlled and automatic components of learned attentional biases. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(8), 1485–1503.
35.
LuceR. D. (1963). A threshold theory for simple detection experiments. Psychological Review, 70(1), 61–79.
36.
MackA. (2003). Inattentional blindness: Looking without seeing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(5), 180–184.
37.
MackintoshN. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82(4), 276–298.
38.
McClellandJ. L.RumelhartD. E. (1985). Distributed memory and the representation of general and specific information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 159–188
39.
McLarenI. P. L.MackintoshN. J. (2000). An elemental model of associative learning: I. Latent inhibition and perceptual learning. Animal Learning & Behavior, 28(3), 211–246.
40.
MelchersK. G.LachnitH.ShanksD. (2004). Within-compound associations in retrospective revaluation and in direct learning: A challenge for comparator theory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section B, 57(1), 25–53.
41.
MelchersK. G.LachnitH.ShanksD. R. (2006). The comparator theory fails to account for the selective role of within-compound associations in cue-selection effects. Experimental Psychology, 53(4), 316–320.
42.
NeisserU. (1979). The control of information pickup in selective looking. In PickA. D. (Ed.), Perception and its development: A tribute to Eleanor Gibson (pp. 201–219). Erlbaum.
43.
NosofskyR. M. (1991). Stimulus bias, asymmetric similarity, and classification. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 94–140.
44.
PearceJ. M.HallG. (1980). A model for Pavlovian learning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychological Review, 87(6), 532–552.
45.
PearceJ. M.KayeH.HallG. (1982). Predictive accuracy and stimulus associability: Development of a model for Pavlovian learning. In CommonsM.HerrnsteinR.WagnerA. R. (Eds.), Quantitative analysis of behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 241–256). Erlbaum.
46.
PearsonD.ChongA.ChowJ. Y. L.GarnerK. G.TheeuwesJ.Le PelleyM. E. (2024). Uncertainty-modulated attentional capture: Outcome variance increases attentional priority. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 153(6), 1628–1643.
47.
PeirceJ.GrayJ. R.SimpsonS.MacAskillM.HöchenbergerR.SogoH.KastmanE.Lindeløv, (2019). PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods, 51(1), 195–203.
48.
PotterM. C. (1976). Short-term conceptual memory for pictures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 2, 509–522.
49.
R Core Team. (2025). R: A anguage and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
50.
RegerM.VrabieO.VolbergG.LingnauA. (2025). Actions at a glance: The time course of action, object, and scene recognition in a free recall paradigm. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 25(3), 693–707.
51.
RensinkR. A.O’reganJ. K.ClarkJ. J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8(5), 368–373.
52.
RescorlaR. A. (1980). Simultaneous and successive associations in sensory preconditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 6(3), 207–216.
53.
RescorlaR. A. (1981). Within-signal learning in autoshaping. Animal Learning & Behavior, 9(2), 245–252.
54.
RescorlaR. A.CunninghamC. L. (1978). Within-compound flavor associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 4(3), 267–275.
55.
RescorlaR. A.DurlachP. J. (1981). Within-event learning in Pavlovian conditioning. In SpearN. E.MillerR. R. (Eds.), Information processing in animals: Memory mechanisms (pp. 81–111). Psychology Press.
56.
RescorlaR. A.FrebergL. (1978). The extinction of within-compound flavor associations. Learning and Motivation, 9(4), 411–427.
57.
RescorlaR. A.WagnerA. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In BlackA. H.ProkasyW. F. (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory (pp. 64–99). Appleton-Century-Crofts.
58.
RumelhartD. E.HintonG. E.WilliamsR. J. (1986). Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature, 323(6088), 533–536.
59.
SchmajukN. A.LamY. W.GrayJ. A. (1996). Latent inhibition: A neural network approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 22(3), 321–349.
60.
SimonsD. J.ChabrisC. F. (1999). Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28, 1059–1074.
61.
SimonsD. J.RensinkR. A. (2005). Change blindness: Past, present, and future. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(1), 16–20.
62.
ThomasG. V.CameronG. N. (1974). Response rate, reinforcement frequency, and behavioral contrast. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22(2), 427–432.
63.
Torrents-RodasD.KoenigS.UengoerM.LachnitH. (2021). Evidence for two attentional mechanisms during learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74(12), 2112–2123. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218211019308
64.
Torrents-RodasD.KoenigS.UengoerM.LachnitH. (2023). The effect of prediction error on overt attention and learning in humans. Behavioural Processes, 206, Article 104843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2023.104843
65.
WalkerA. R.LuqueD.Le PelleyM. E.BeesleyT. (2019). The role of uncertainty in attentional and choice exploration. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(6), 1911–1916.
66.
WalkerA. R.NavarroD. J.NewellB. R.BeesleyT. (2022). Protection from uncertainty in the exploration/exploitation trade-off. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 48(4), 547–568.
67.
WassermanE.BerglanL. R. (1998). Backward blocking and recovery from overshadowing in human causal judgement: The role of within-compound associations. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section B, 51(2), 121–138.
68.
WelhamA. K.WillsA. J. (2011). Unitization, similarity, and overt attention in categorization and exposure. Memory & Cognition, 39(8), 1518–1533.
WittJ. K.TaylorJ. E. T.SugovicM.WixtedJ. T. (2015). Signal detection measures cannot distinguish perceptual biases from response biases. Perception, 44(3), 289–300.
