A comparison of cue competition in a simple and a complex design

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests that controlled reasoning processes play an important role in cue competition in human causal learning (see De Houwer, J., Beckers, T., & Vandorpe, S. (2005). Evidence for the role of higher-order reasoning processes in cue competition and other learning phenomena. Learning &Behavior, 33(2), 239–249, for a review). Until now, this evidence comes almost exclusively from studies with simple designs that involved only a limited number of cues. Little is known about the role of controlled reasoning processes when the design is more complex. It is important to examine this issue because the complexity of the design could determine the resources that are available for reasoning and thus the role that reasoning plays in cue competition. We directly compared cue competition in a simple and a complex design. The results showed that complexity of the design affected retrospective cue competition but not forward cue competition. More fine grained analyses with respect to retrospective cue competition showed that unovershadowing but not backward blocking differed significantly between complexity conditions.