scholarly journals Second-Order Conditioning and Conditioned Inhibition: Influences of Speed versus Accuracy on Human Causal Learning

PLoS ONE ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. e49899 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica C. Lee ◽  
Evan J. Livesey
Keyword(s):  
Conditioned Inhibition ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Causal Learning ◽  
Order Conditioning ◽  
Human Causal Learning

Second-order conditioning of human causal learning

2006 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 230-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elvia Jara ◽  
Javier Vila ◽  
Antonio Maldonado
Keyword(s):  
Second Order ◽  
Causal Learning ◽  
Order Conditioning ◽  
Human Causal Learning

Second-Order Backward Blocking and Unovershadowing in Human Causal Learning

2002 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan De Houwer ◽  
Tom Beckers
Keyword(s):  
Higher Order ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Causal Learning ◽  
First Order ◽  
Human Causal Learning ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Causal Status

Abstract. De Houwer and Beckers (in press , Experiment 1) recently demonstrated that ratings about the relation between a target cue T2 and an outcome are higher when training involves CT1+ and T1T2+ followed by C+ trials than when training involves CT1+ and T1T2+ followed by C- trials. We replicated this study but now explicitly asked participants to rate the causal status of the cues both before and after the C+ or C- trials. Results showed that causal ratings for T2 were significantly higher after C+ trials than before C+ trials and that T2 received significantly lower ratings after C- trials than before C- trials. The results thus provide the first evidence for higher-order unovershadowing and higher-order backward blocking. In addition, the ratings for T1 revealed that first-order backward blocking (i.e., decrease in ratings for T1 as the result of C+ trials) was stronger than first-order unovershadowing (i.e., increase in ratings for T1 as the result of C- trials).

scholarly journals Second-Order Conditioning in Humans

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica C. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Conditioned Inhibition ◽  
Large Body ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Critical Parameters ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Order Conditioning ◽  
Potential Interactions

In contrast to the large body of work demonstrating second-order conditioning (SOC) in non-human animals, the evidence for SOC in humans is scant. In this review, I examine the existing literature and suggest theoretical and procedural explanations for why SOC has been so elusive in humans. In particular, I discuss potential interactions with conditioned inhibition, whether SOC is rational, and propose critical parameters needed to obtain the effect. I conclude that SOC is a real but difficult phenomenon to obtain in humans, and suggest directions for future research.

Blocking of Conditioned Inhibition in Human Causal Learning

2009 ◽  
Vol 56 (6) ◽  
pp. 381-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Lotz ◽  
Bram Vervliet ◽  
Harald Lachnit
Keyword(s):  
Conditioned Inhibition ◽  
Causal Learning ◽  
Cue Competition ◽  
Learning Study ◽  
Human Causal Learning

Compared to blocking of conditioned excitation, which is one of the most investigated cue competition phenomena, blocking of conditioned inhibition has more or less been neglected in conditioning research. We conducted a human causal learning study and found evidence for blocking of conditioned inhibition. The results favor the view that inhibition is the symmetrical opposite of excitation, underlying the same general principles.

Higher-Order Retrospective Revaluation in Human Causal Learning

2002 ◽  
Vol 55 (2b) ◽  
pp. 137-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan De Houwer ◽  
Tom Beckers
Keyword(s):  
Higher Order ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Causal Learning ◽  
Retrospective Revaluation ◽  
Wagner Model ◽  
Third Order ◽  
Contrast Model ◽  
Human Causal Learning ◽  
Causal Status ◽  
Comparator Model

Previous studies demonstrated that participants will retrospectively adjust their ratings about the relation between a target cue and an outcome on the basis of information about the causal status of a competing cue that was previously paired with the target cue. We demonstrate that such retrospective revaluation effects occur not only for target cues with which the competing cue was associated directly, but also for target cues that were associated indirectly with the competing cue. These second-order and third-order retrospective revaluation effects are compatible with certain implementations of the probabilistic contrast model and with a modified, extended comparator model, but cannot be explained on the basis of a revised Rescorla—Wagner model or a revised SOP model.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document