Selectivity in associative learning: a cognitive stage framework for blocking and cue competition phenomena.

Yannick Boddez,Tom Beckers,Kim Haesen,Frank Baeyens

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01305

Yannick Boddez, Tom Beckers + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01305

Copy DOI

Abstract

Blocking is the most important phenomenon in the history of associative learning theory: for over 40 years, blocking has inspired a whole generation of learning models. Blocking is part of a family of effects that are typically termed “cue competition” effects. Common amongst all cue competition effects is that a cue-outcome relation is poorly learned or poorly expressed because the cue is trained in the presence of an alternative predictor or cause of the outcome. We provide an overview of the cognitive processes involved in cue competition effects in humans and propose a stage framework that brings these processes together. The framework contends that the behavioral display of cue competition is cognitively construed following three stages that include (1) an encoding stage, (2) a retention stage, and (3) a performance stage. We argue that the stage framework supports a comprehensive understanding of cue competition effects.

Highlights

Associative learning refers to a change in behavior due to regularities in stimulus presentation (De Houwer et al, 2013)
We provide an overview of the cognitive processes involved in cue competition effects in humans and propose a stage framework that brings these processes together.The framework contends that the behavioral display of cue competition is cognitively construed following three stages that include (1) an encoding stage, (2) a retention stage, and (3) a performance stage
We argue that the stage framework supports a comprehensive understanding of cue competition effects

Summary

Introduction

Associative learning refers to a change in behavior due to regularities in stimulus presentation (De Houwer et al, 2013). 5) pioneered this procedure, by presenting rats with pairings of a white noise stimulus with shock (A+) followed by pairings of a compound of the white noise stimulus and a new light stimulus with shock (AX+), and made the famous observation that “prior conditioning to an element might block conditioning to a new, superimposed element.”. This result has since been replicated many times, supporting the idea that preparatory responding to a redundant cue remains low, despite its being paired with the outcome. There is evidence of blocking in a variety of species including snails (e.g., Acebes et al, 2009; Prados et al, 2013), honeybees (e.g., Blaser et al, 2004), goldfish (e.g., Tennant and Bitterman, 1975), rats (e.g., kamin, unpublished), and humans (Dickinson et al, 1984)

Objectives

Discussion

Conclusion