On Potential-Based and Direct Movements in Information Spaces

Abstract

Learning can be portrayed as a movement in a state space. Potential-based explanations of such movements hold that learners use a gradient-descent process to minimize a potential function. Direct explanations hold that learning is specific to information for learning. This study contrasts specific hypotheses derived from these general approaches. Participants estimated the length of arrow shafts of Müller-Lyer displays. Experiment 1 shows that learning in this paradigm can indeed be portrayed as a movement in a state space. In Experiment 2 nonveridical feedback was used in such a way that the contrasted hypotheses predicted learning in opposite directions. No learning was observed. In Experiment 3, movements in the state space were observed with practice conditions in which one of the hypotheses specified a movement in the state space whereas the other did not specify any movement. A tentative explanation for these findings is that both hypotheses are partly correct. However, more than to the empirical findings for this particular task, the authors wish to draw attention to the distinction between potential-based and direct processes—a distinction that they consider of general importance for the understanding of learning.