Summation effects in human learning: evidence from patterning discriminations in goal-tracking.

Abstract

Participants in two human goal-tracking experiments were simultaneously trained with negative patterning (NP) and positive patterning (PP) discriminations (A+, B+, AB-, C-, D-, CD+). Both elemental and configural models of associative learning predict a PP advantage, such that NP is solved less readily than PP. However, elemental models like the unique cue approach additionally predict responding in AB- trials to be initially stronger than that in A+ and B+ trials due to summation of associative strength. Both experiments revealed a PP advantage and a strong summation effect in AB- trials in the first half of the experiments, irrespective of whether the same US was used for both discriminations (Experiment 1) or two different USs (Experiment 2). We discuss that the correct predictions of the unique cue approach are based on its assumptions of non-normalized and context-independent stimulus processing rather than elemental processing per se.