Warning: Undefined array key "mm" in /www/wwwroot/www.ai-bt.com/si.php on line 10 Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /www/wwwroot/www.ai-bt.com/si.php on line 10 Forward blocking depends on retrospective inferences about the presence of the blocked cue during the elemental phase.

Literature DB >> 11958351

Forward blocking depends on retrospective inferences about the presence of the blocked cue during the elemental phase.

Abstract

When a compound cue AT is followed by an outcome (AT+), human participants will judge the relation between cue T and the outcome to be less strong if A alone was previously paired with the outcome (A+). According to the probabilistic contrast model, such a blocking effect is due to the fact that participants regard the A+ trials as trials on which A and the outcome are present but T is absent. The results of two studies showed that when the status of T was ambiguous during the A+ trials, judgments about T depended on subsequent information about the presence of T during the A+ trials. These findings support the probabilistic contrast model but are incompatible with the (revised) Rescorla-Wagner (Rescorla & Wagner, 1972) model.

Entities: Species

Mesh：

Year: 2002 PMID： 11958351 DOI： 10.3758/bf03195262

Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mem Cognit ISSN： 0090-502X

7 in total

Forward blocking depends on retrospective inferences about the presence of the blocked cue during the elemental phase.

1. Competition among causes but not effects in predictive and diagnostic learning.

2. Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: asymmetries in cue competition.

3. Cue interaction in human contingency judgment.

4. Within-compound associations mediate the retrospective revaluation of causality judgements.

5. Second-order backward blocking and unovershadowing in human causal learning.

6. Higher-order retrospective revaluation in human causal learning.

7. Outcome and cue properties modulate blocking.

Review 1. Evidence for the role of higher order reasoning processes in cue competition and other learning phenomena.

2. Competence and performance in causal learning.

Review 3. Comparing associative, statistical, and inferential reasoning accounts of human contingency learning.

4. The propositional approach to associative learning as an alternative for association formation models.

5. Causal superlearning arising from interactions among cues.

6. People want to see information that will help them make valid inferences in human causal learning.

7. Further evidence for the role of inferential reasoning in forward blocking.