Literature DB >> 28405958

Previously acquired cue-outcome structural knowledge guides new learning: Evidence from the retroactive-interference-between-cues effect.

David Luque1,2,3,4, Joaquín Morís5,6,7, Francisco J López5,6, Pedro L Cobos5,6.   

Abstract

The effect of retroactive interference between cues predicting the same outcome (RIBC) occurs when the behavioral expression of a cue-outcome association (e.g., A→O1) is reduced due to the later acquisition of an association between a different cue and the same outcome (e.g., B→O1). In the present experimental series, we show that this effect can be modulated by knowledge concerning the structure of these cue-outcome relationships. In Experiments 1A and 1B, a pretraining phase was included to promote the expectation of either a one-to-one (OtO) or a many-to-one (MtO) cue-outcome structure during the subsequent RIBC training phases. We hypothesized that the adoption of an OtO expectation would make participants infer that the previously learned A→O1 relationship would not hold any longer after the exposure to B→O1 trials. Alternatively, the adoption of an MtO expectation would prevent participants from making such an inference. Experiment 1B included an additional condition without pretraining, to assess whether the OtO structure was expected by default. Experiment 2 included control conditions to assess the RIBC effect and induced the expectation of an OtO or MtO structure without the addition of a pretraining phase. Overall, the results suggest that participants effectively induced structural expectations regarding the cue-outcome contingencies. In turn, these expectations may have potentiated (OtO expectation) or alleviated (MtO expectation) the RIBC effect, depending on how well these expectations could accommodate the target A→O1 test association. This pattern of results poses difficulties for current explanations of the RIBC effect, since these explanations do not consider the incidence of cue-outcome structural expectations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Associative learning; Interference; Interference between cues; Structural knowledge; Top-down

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28405958     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-017-0705-4

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


  17 in total

1.  Associative interference between cues and between outcomes presented together and presented apart: an integration.

Authors:  Ralph R. Miller; Martha Escobar
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2002-04-28       Impact factor: 1.777

Review 2.  A review of recent developments in research and theories on human contingency learning.

Authors:  Jan De Houwer; Tom Beckers
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol B       Date:  2002-10

3.  Two systems of reasoning: architecture and relation to emotion.

Authors:  Adam L Darlow; Steven A Sloman
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci       Date:  2010-04-07

4.  A conceptual and theoretical analysis of evaluative conditioning.

Authors:  Jan De Houwer
Journal:  Span J Psychol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 1.264

Review 5.  Associationism and cognition: human contingency learning at 25.

Authors:  David R Shanks
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.143

Review 6.  Comparing associative, statistical, and inferential reasoning accounts of human contingency learning.

Authors:  Oskar Pineño; Ralph R Miller
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.143

7.  Backward blocking: the role of within-compound associations and interference between cues trained apart.

Authors:  Miguel A Vadillo; Leyre Castro; Helena Matute; Edward A Wasserman
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.143

8.  Interference between cues of the same outcome in a non-causally framed scenario.

Authors:  David Luque; Joaquín Morís; Pedro L Cobos; Francisco J López
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2008-11-25       Impact factor: 1.777

Review 9.  Learning: from association to cognition.

Authors:  David R Shanks
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 24.137

Review 10.  Context, time, and memory retrieval in the interference paradigms of Pavlovian learning.

Authors:  M E Bouton
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 17.737

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.