Abstract

In human causal learning, excitatory and inhibitory learning effects can sometimes be found in the same paradigm by altering the learning conditions. This study aims to explore whether learning in the feature negative paradigm can be dissociated by emphasising speed over accuracy. In two causal learning experiments, participants were given a feature negative discrimination in which the outcome caused by one cue was prevented by the addition of another. Participants completed training trials either in a self-paced fashion with instructions emphasising accuracy, or under strict time constraints with instructions emphasising speed. Using summation tests in which the preventative cue was paired with another causal cue, participants in the accuracy groups correctly rated the preventative cue as if it reduced the probability of the outcome. However, participants in the speed groups rated the preventative cue as if it increased the probability of the outcome. In Experiment 1, both speed and accuracy groups later judged the same cue to be preventative in a reasoned inference task. Experiment 2 failed to find evidence of similar dissociations in retrospective revaluation (release from overshadowing vs. mediated extinction) or learning about a redundant cue (blocking vs. augmentation). However in the same experiment, the tendency for the accuracy group to show conditioned inhibition and the speed group to show second-order conditioning was consistent even across sub-sets of the speed and accuracy groups with equivalent accuracy in training, suggesting that second-order conditioning is not merely a consequence of poorer acquisition. This dissociation mirrors the trade-off between second-order conditioning and conditioned inhibition observed in animal conditioning when training is extended.

Highlights

  • In a typical human causal learning experiment, cues are presented that may increase or decrease the likelihood of a particular outcome and the participant’s task is to assess to what degree each cue either causes or prevents that outcome

  • Conditioned inhibition results from experience with a feature negative (FN) discrimination, where one cue leads to an outcome (A+), but when it is paired with a second cue, no outcome occurs (AX2)

  • Even in the last 24 trials when the accuracy group were at their best performance, they were still slower than the speed group by 0.50 seconds, F(1, 46) = 28.51, p

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In a typical human causal learning experiment, cues are presented that may increase or decrease the likelihood of a particular outcome and the participant’s task is to assess to what degree each cue either causes or prevents that outcome. Several experiments have found evidence of conditioned inhibition using a conservative test in which the ratings for the critical summation test compound BX are compared to ratings for a compound of B and a neutral or novel stimulus [5,6]. In these studies, ratings for BX were substantially diminished, indicating that learning about6reduces causal ratings above and beyond what would be expected from a simple external inhibition effect; the reduction in ratings produced by pairing B with any other stimulus that has not been paired with the outcome [5]. Like several other phenomena, conditioned inhibition appears to be common to a range of very different learning paradigms from Pavlovian conditioning to human causal judgment

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
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