Previously acquired cue-outcome structural knowledge guides new learning: Evidence from the retroactive-interference-between-cues effect
- PMID: 28405958
- DOI: 10.3758/s13421-017-0705-4
Previously acquired cue-outcome structural knowledge guides new learning: Evidence from the retroactive-interference-between-cues effect
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.
Keywords: Associative learning; Interference; Interference between cues; Structural knowledge; Top-down.
Similar articles
-
Neural correlates of cue predictiveness during intentional and incidental associative learning: A time-frequency study.Int J Psychophysiol. 2019 Sep;143:80-87. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2019.06.010. Epub 2019 Jun 27. Int J Psychophysiol. 2019. PMID: 31254544
-
Learned changes in outcome associability.Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 Feb;72(2):209-221. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2017.1344258. Epub 2018 Jan 1. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019. PMID: 28627301
-
Interference between cues of the same outcome in a non-causally framed scenario.Behav Processes. 2009 Jun;81(2):328-32. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2008.11.009. Epub 2008 Nov 25. Behav Processes. 2009. PMID: 19070656
-
Expectation mismatch: differences between self-generated and cue-induced expectations.Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014 Oct;46 Pt 1:139-57. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.06.009. Epub 2014 Jun 24. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014. PMID: 24971824 Review.
-
Stepping back from 'persistence and relapse' to see the forest: Associative interference.Behav Processes. 2017 Aug;141(Pt 1):128-136. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2017.03.014. Epub 2017 Mar 18. Behav Processes. 2017. PMID: 28323076 Free PMC article. Review.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources