Literature DB >> 21048227

Generalization decrements: further support for flexibility in stimulus processing.

Anna Thorwart1, Harald Lachnit.   

Abstract

Thorwart and Lachnit (2009) found reliable symmetrical decrements in two generalization tasks: Removing an already trained component from a compound did not result in larger decrements than adding a new one did. In two contingency learning experiments, we investigated first whether time pressure during stimulus processing, as well as the degree of perceptual grouping, was effective in controlling the symmetry of the decrements (Experiment 1); and second, whether the symmetry was affected by the causal versus predictive nature of the relationship between the cue and the outcome (Experiment 2). The experiments generated unexpected results, since both revealed asymmetrical decrements independent of the manipulations introduced. They therefore demonstrate that more research is needed in order to understand the variables influencing stimulus representation in human associative learning.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21048227     DOI: 10.3758/LB.38.4.367

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Learn Behav        ISSN: 1543-4494            Impact factor:   1.986


  30 in total

1.  Associative changes in elements and compounds when the other is reinforced.

Authors:  R A Rescorla
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1999-04

2.  Differential effects of adding and removing components of a context on the generalization of conditional freezing.

Authors:  Felisa González; Jennifer J Quinn; Michael S Fanselow
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2003-01

3.  Evolution of an elemental theory of Pavlovian conditioning.

Authors:  Allan R Wagner
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  HMS: a MATLAB simulator of the Harris model of associative learning.

Authors:  Holger Schultheis; Anna Thorwart; Harald Lachnit
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2008-05

5.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

Review 6.  What's elementary about associative learning?

Authors:  E A Wasserman; R R Miller
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 24.137

7.  Convergent results in eyeblink conditioning and contingency learning in humans: addition of a common cue does not affect feature-negative discriminations.

Authors:  Anna Thorwart; Steven Glautier; Harald Lachnit
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2010-07-16       Impact factor: 3.251

8.  Contrasting predictive and causal values of predictors and of causes.

Authors:  Oskar Pineño; James C Denniston; Tom Beckers; Helena Matute; Ralph R Miller
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.986

9.  Second-order conditioning in human predictive judgements when there is little time to think.

Authors:  Danielle M Karazinov; Robert A Boakes
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.143

10.  Similarity and discrimination in human Pavlovian conditioning.

Authors:  Annette Kinder; Harald Lachnit
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 4.016

View more
  2 in total

1.  Explaining compound generalization in associative and causal learning through rational principles of dimensional generalization.

Authors:  Fabian A Soto; Samuel J Gershman; Yael Niv
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Three Ways That Non-associative Knowledge May Affect Associative Learning Processes.

Authors:  Anna Thorwart; Evan J Livesey
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-12-27
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.