Literature DB >> 31986984

Contingency learning as binding? Testing an exemplar view of the colour-word contingency learning effect.

James R Schmidt1, Carina G Giesen2, Klaus Rothermund2.   

Abstract

The learning of contingent regularities between events is fundamental for interacting with our world. We are also heavily influenced by recent experiences, as frequently studied in the stimulus-response binding literature. According to one view ("unitary view"), the learning of regularities across many events and the influence of recent events on current performance can coherently be explained with one high-learning rate memory mechanism. That is, contingency learning effects and binding effects are essentially the same thing, only studied at different timescales. On the other hand, there may be more to a contingency effect than just the summation of the influence of past events (e.g., an additional impact of learned regularities). To test these possibilities, the current report reanalyses a number of datasets from the colour-word contingency learning paradigm. It is shown that the weighted sum of binding effects accumulated across many previous trials (with especially strong influence of very recent events) does explain a large chunk of the contingency effect, but not all of it. In particular, the asymptote towards which the contingency effect decreases by accounting for an increasing number of previous-trial binding effects is robustly above zero. On the other hand, we also observe evidence for higher-order interactions between binding effects at differing lags, suggesting that a mere linear accumulation of binding episodes might underestimate their influence on contingency learning. Accordingly, focusing only on episodic stimulus-response binding effects that are due to the last occurrence of a stimulus rendered contingency learning effects non-significant. Implications for memory models are discussed.

Keywords:  Contingency learning; binding; episodic memory; exemplars; mixed effect models; multicollinearity

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31986984     DOI: 10.1177/1747021820906397

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)        ISSN: 1747-0218            Impact factor:   2.143


  6 in total

1.  The shaping of cognitive control based on the adaptive weighting of expectations and experience.

Authors:  Jihyun Suh; Julie M Bugg
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2021-09-27       Impact factor: 3.140

2.  Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All.

Authors:  Klaus Rothermund; Nathalie Gollnick; Carina G Giesen
Journal:  J Cogn       Date:  2022-06-29

3.  Contextual Features of the Cue Enter Episodic Bindings in Task Switching.

Authors:  Elena Benini; Iring Koch; Susanne Mayr; Christian Frings; Andrea M Philipp
Journal:  J Cogn       Date:  2022-04-18

4.  Being in the Know: The Role of Awareness and Retrieval of Transient Stimulus-Response Bindings in Selective Contingency Learning.

Authors:  Mrudula Arunkumar; Klaus Rothermund; Wilfried Kunde; Carina G Giesen
Journal:  J Cogn       Date:  2022-06-09

5.  Evidence for a Selective Influence of Short-Term Experiences on the Retrieval of Item-Specific Long-Term Bindings.

Authors:  Hannah Dames; Andrea Kiesel; Christina U Pfeuffer
Journal:  J Cogn       Date:  2022-05-26

6.  Feature-specific retrieval of the knowledge of having lied before: Persons and questions independently retrieve truth-related information.

Authors:  Franziska Schreckenbach; Klaus Rothermund
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 2.138

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.