Abstract

Notwithstanding the success of CBT, it is relatively unknown how individuals can better profit from corrective learning experiences. Various theories postulate that prediction errors – the difference between what is occurring and what is expected – are the driving force of associative (re)learning. While prediction errors are typically operationalized as violations of cognitive outcome expectancies, direct physiological indices of prediction errors could capture potentially more essential automatic and emotional processes in associative learning. Although physiological responses have previously been suggested to reflect prediction errors, it remains elusive if these measures actually predict changes in subsequent conditioned responding. In three fear-conditioning experiments, we compared pupil dilation and skin conductance responses to unexpected outcomes – unconditioned stimulus (US) presentations or omissions – with expected outcomes, and tested whether outcome responses predicted actual changes in subsequent conditioned responding. We found evidence for increased physiological responses to unexpected outcomes, but the results were inconsistent across experiments. Furthermore, only pupil responses to US presentations consistently predicted an increase in conditioned responding, making it difficult to reconcile our findings with associative learning models. Both pupil dilation and skin conductance can thus index unexpected outcomes, but the relationship of these responses to future learning is not evident and requires further investigation.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call