Past experience influences the processing of stimulus compounds in human Pavlovian conditioning

In two human skin conductance conditioning experiments we investigated whether processing of stimulus compounds can be influenced by past experience. Participants were either pre-trained with a discrimination problem that could be solved elementally (A+, B−, AB+, C− in Experiment 1 and A+, AB+, C−, CB− in Experiment 2) or one that required a configural solution (AB+, BC−, CD+, DA− in Experiment 1 and A−, AB+, C+, CB− in Experiment 2). After pre-training, participants were shown an EX+, FX− discrimination. Subsequently, responding to individual components (E and F) was tested. After elemental pre-training, participants showed larger responses to the component from the previously reinforced compound (E) than to the component from the nonreinforced compound (F) whereas no such difference was found after configural pre-training. This means that the kind of pre-training influenced whether the later discrimination problem was processed elementally or configurally. The results indicate that organisms can flexibly process stimulus compounds in different ways.     

Similarity and Discrimination Learning

The role played by similarity in discrimination learning was examined in four experiments using compound stimuli. In Experiment 1, pigeons received training in which food was presented after stimulus A, compound AB, but not compound ABC—A+ BC+ ABCo. The A+ ABCo discrimination was acquired more readily than was the BC+ ABCo discrimination. In the remaining experiments, training was of the form, A+ B+ C+ AB+ AC+ BC+ ABCo. The discrimination between the single stimuli A+ B+ C+ and ABCo consistently developed more readily than between the pairs of stimuli AB+ AC+ BC+, and ABCo. The results are shown to be more consistent with a configural than with an elemental theory of conditioning.     

Solving XOR

Three experiments examined the way in which exclusive-or (XOR) problems are solved by rats. All rats first received food-rewarded positive and negative patterning problems with two stimulus sets: either A+, B+, AB- and C-, D-, CD+, or A-, B-, AB + and C+, D +, and CD-. Subsequently, rats received revaluation trials in which A was paired with shock and C was not, prior to generalization test trials with B, D, AB, and CD (Experiments 1 & 2); or received A-->shock trials prior to tests with B and CD (Experiment 3). There was greater generalized fear to B than to either D (Experiments 1 & 2) or AB (Experiment 2) and CD (Experiments 2 & 3). These results are inconsistent with configural, connectionist models, but are consistent with an alternative connectionist model that can represent the logical structure of XOR problems.     

Summation effects in human learning: evidence from patterning discriminations in goal-tracking

Participants in two human goal-tracking experiments were simultaneously trained with negative patterning (NP) and positive patterning (PP) discriminations (A+, B+, AB–, C–, D–, CD+). Both elemental and configural models of associative learning predict a PP advantage, such that NP is solved less readily than PP. However, elemental models like the unique cue approach additionally predict responding in AB– trials to be initially stronger than that in A+ and B+ trials due to summation of associative strength. Both experiments revealed a PP advantage and a strong summation effect in AB– trials in the first half of the experiments, irrespective of whether the same US was used for both discriminations (Experiment 1) or two different USs (Experiment 2). We discuss that the correct predictions of the unique cue approach are based on its assumptions of non-normalized and context-independent stimulus processing rather than elemental processing per se.     

Summation: Further assessment of a configural theory

Rats received Pavlovian conditioning in which food was signalled by a visual stimulus, A+, an auditory stimulus, B+, and a compound composed of different visual and auditory stimuli, CD+. Test trials were then given with the compound AB. Experiments 1 and 2A revealed stronger responding during AB than during CD. In Experiment 2B, there was no evidence of a summation of responding during AB when A+ B+ training was conducted in the absence of CD+ trials. A further failure to observe abnormally strong responding during ABwas found in Experiment 3 for which the training trials with A+ B+ CD+ were accompanied by trials in which C and D were separately paired with food. The results are explained in terms of a configural theory of conditioning, which assumes that responding during a compound is determined by generalization from its components, as well as from other compounds to which it is similar.     

Multimodal discrimination learning in humans: Evidence for configural theory

Human contingency learning was used to compare the predictions of configural and elemental theories. In three experiments, participants were required to learn which indicators were associated with an increase in core temperature of a fictitious nuclear plant. Experiments 1 and 2 investigated the rate at which a triple-element stimulus (ABC) could be discriminated from either single-element stimuli (A, B, and C) or double-element stimuli (AB, BC, and AC). Experiment 1 used visual stimuli, whilst Experiment 2 used visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli. In both experiments the participants took longer to discriminate the triple-element stimulus from the more similar double-element stimuli than from the less similar single-element stimuli. Experiment 3 tested for summation with stimuli from either a single or multiple modalities, and summation was found only in the latter case. Thus, the pattern of results seen in Experiments 1 and 2 was not dependent on whether the stimuli were single modal or multimodal, nor was it dependent on whether the stimuli could elicit summation. This pattern of results is consistent with predictions derived from Pearce's (1987, 1994) configural theory.     

Multimodal discrimination learning in humans: evidence for configural theory

Human contingency learning was used to compare the predictions of configural and elemental theories. In three experiments, participants were required to learn which indicators were associated with an increase in core temperature of a fictitious nuclear plant. Experiments 1 and 2 investigated the rate at which a triple-element stimulus (ABC) could be discriminated from either single-element stimuli (A, B, and C) or double-element stimuli (AB, BC, and AC). Experiment 1 used visual stimuli, whilst Experiment 2 used visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli. In both experiments the participants took longer to discriminate the triple-element stimulus from the more similar double-element stimuli than from the less similar single-element stimuli. Experiment 3 tested for summation with stimuli from either a single or multiple modalities, and summation was found only in the latter case. Thus, the pattern of results seen in Experiments 1 and 2 was not dependent on whether the stimuli were single modal or multimodal, nor was it dependent on whether the stimuli could elicit summation. This pattern of results is consistent with predictions derived from Pearce's (1987, 1994) configural theory.     

Contextual control in discrimination reversal learning

In 3 human predictive learning experiments, the authors examined contextual control of responding in discrimination reversal learning. In Phase 1, a discrimination between 2 stimuli (A+, B-) was trained in Context 1. During Phase 2, participants received discrimination reversal training (A-, B+) in Context 2. Testing occurred in Context 1 and Context 2 (Experiments 1A and 1B) or in Context 1 and Context 3 (Experiment 2). During the test phase, performance in Context 1 and Context 2 reflected the contingencies trained during Phase 1 and Phase 2, respectively. When testing occurred in Context 3, there was no discriminative responding between A and B. In addition, the experiments demonstrated that discriminating stimuli with a consistent reinforcement history were also affected by contextual manipulations. Results indicate that each training context acquires the ability to control performance. Unique-cue and configural approaches account for a major part of the results.     

Representational blending in human conditional learning: Implications for associative theory.

In two experiments, participants were presented with pictures of different foods (A, B, C, D, X,) and learned which combinations resulted in an allergic reaction in a fictitious patient, Mr X. In Problem 1, when A or B (but not C or D) was combined with food X an allergic reaction occurred, and when C or D (but not A or B) was combined with Y an allergic reaction occurred. In Experiment 1, participants also received Problem 2 in which A, B, C, and D interacted with foods V and W either in the same way as X and Y, respectively, or in a different way. Participants performed more proficiently in the former than in the latter condition. In Experiment 2, after training on Problem 1, participants judged whether or not novel combinations of foods (e.g., AB, CD, AD, CB) would cause an allergic reaction in Mr X. They were no more likely to indicate that AB or CD would cause an allergic reaction than AD or CB, but made their judgements more rapidly and with greater confidence on AB and CD trials than on AD and CB trials. These results (1) indicate that shared representations come to be addressed by the components of similar compounds (e.g., AX and BX) that have predicted the same outcome (an allergic reaction), and (2) are inconsistent with standard, associative theories of learning, but (3) are consistent with findings from nonhuman animals and with a connectionist interpretation of these findings.     

Transfer of configural learning between the components of a preexposed stimulus compound: implications for elemental and configural models of learning

In 2 experiments, rats received preexposure to 2 compound contexts: AB and CD for the congruent group and AC and BD for the incongruent group. Subsequently, all rats received a configural discrimination in which separate placement in contexts A or B indicated that presentations of stimulus X would be followed by food and presentations of Y would not, and separate placement in contexts C and D indicated that Y would be followed by food and X would not. In both experiments, rats in the congruent group acquired the conditional discrimination more rapidly than those in the incongruent group. These results are inconsistent with conventional associative accounts of either stimulus preexposure effects or configural learning and instead provide support for a connectionist account.     

Effects of discrimination training on responding during a compound conditioned stimulus.

Four experiments examined responding in the presence of a triple-element compound ABC after discrimination training in which 2 compounds, AB and BC, signaled the delivery of food and 1 element alone, B, signaled the absence of food. In Experiments 1 and 2, using rats, responding during ABC was more vigorous than in a control group for which A and C but not B had been individually paired with food. This finding was replicated in Experiment 3, which used pigeons, and in Experiment 4, where all 3 stimuli of the control condition were individually paired with food. The results are more consistent with a configural than with an elemental theory of learning.     

Stimulus Salience and Negative Patterning

Rats in Experiment 1 received a negative patterning discrimination in which food was delivered after either of two auditory stimuli when they were presented individually, but not when they were presented in compound. The stimuli were of different intensity. The discrimination between the compound and the stimulus of lower intensity was acquired more readily than was the discrimination between the compound and the more intense stimulus. A similar pattern of results was found in the remaining two experiments, which also employed a negative patterning discrimination, but either with stimuli from different modalities (Experiment 2) or with pigeons rather than rats (Experiment 3). The results were predicted more readily by a configural than by an elemental theory of conditioning.     

Elemental and configural encoding of the conditioned stimulus.

Five experiments explored the effect of conditioning AB and CD compounds on responding to transfer AD and BC compounds and to elements. These experiments used several conditioning procedures: flavour aversion and instrumental discriminative learning in rats and autoshaping in pigeons. All of the experiments found greater responding to the trained AB and CD than to the transfer AD and BC compounds, a result that agrees with some configural models, but not with an elemental model. All experiments also found greater responding to the transfer AD and BC compounds than to the elements, a result that agrees with elemental, but not configural, models.     

Configural learning in two species of marsupial (Setonix brachyurus and Sminthopsis crassicaudata)

Four experiments examined the ability of quokkas (Setonix brachyurus) and fat-tailed dunnarts (Sminthopsis crassicaudata) to solve 2 configural tasks: transverse and negative patterning. Transverse patterning requires the simultaneous solution of 3 overlapping discrimination problems (A+ B-, B+ C-, C+ A-). Both species could solve the nonoverlapping (elemental) version of this task (U+ V-, W+ X-, Y+ Z-), but only dunnarts solved the transverse patterning task. Negative patterning requires conditioned responses to 2 stimuli when presented separately but not together (A+, B+, AB-). Both species formed a selective conditioned response to A+ and B+ stimuli and inhibited responding to a simple nonreinforced stimulus (C-), but only dunnarts successfully inhibited responding to the AB- compound to solve the negative patterning task. These experiments are the first to demonstrate configural learning in a marsupial.     

Overshadowing and associability change

Three appetitive Pavlovian conditioning experiments with rats examined the associability of stimuli A and B that had a history of compound conditioning (AB+), relative to stimuli X and Y that had a history of conditioning in isolation (X+, Y+). Following this training, Experiment 1 revealed that conditioned responding was higher to X and Y than to A and B (overshadowing). In a subsequent AY+, AX-, BY- test discrimination, the AY/BY discrimination was solved more readily than the AY/AX discrimination. In Experiment 2, following AB+, X+, Y+ training, A and Y were presented as a compound and signaled the availability of reinforcement upon the performance of an instrumental response. Test trials in which A and Y were presented alone, and in extinction, revealed that A acquired greater control of instrumental responding than Y. Experiment 3 revealed that following AB+, X+, Y+ training, A and B served as more effective discriminative stimuli for instrumental responding than X and Y. Overall, these results imply that the associability of stimuli conditioned in compound is higher than stimuli conditioned in isolation. These results are discussed in terms of attentional theories of associative learning.     

Some properties of configural learning: an investigation of the transverse-patterning problem.

Little is known about the conditions that encourage animals to learn to use configural associations to guide their behavior or the consequences of such learning for transfer. This study provided some information about these issues by examining how rats solve the transverse-patterning problem, which requires a configural solution (Spence, 1952). Animals had to concurrently solve 3 simultaneous visual discriminations, represented abstractly as A+ versus B-, B+ versus C-, and C+ versus A-. Experiment 1 indicated that rats use a configural solution even when the problems have an elemental solution, provided that the significance of 1 element (e.g., B) shared by 2 problems is ambiguous (e.g., A+/B-; and B+/C-). Experiments 2 and 3 suggested that, when stimulated to use a configural solution by solving the A+/B- and B+/C- problems, rats transfer the configural solution to problems that have no ambiguous elements.     

A modified version of the unique cue theory accounts for olfactory compound processing in honeybees

We investigated the capability of honeybees to discriminate between single odorants, binary olfactory mixtures, and ternary olfactory mixtures in olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension reflex. In Experiment 1, three single odorants (A+, B+, and C+) and three binary mixtures of these odors (AB+, AC+, and BC+) were reinforced while the ternary compound, consisting of all three odors (ABC-), was nonreinforced. In Experiment 2, only one single odorant (A+) and one binary olfactory compound (BC+) were reinforced while the ternary compound (ABC-) consisting of the single odor and the binary compound was nonreinforced. We studied whether bees can solve these problems and whether the course of differentiation can be predicted by the unique cue theory, a modified unique cue theory, or Pearce's configural theory. Honeybees were not able to differentiate reinforced from nonreinforced stimuli in Experiment 1. However, summation to ABC observed at the beginning of training contradicts the predictions of Pearce's configural theory. In Experiment 2, differentiation between the single odorant A and the ternary compound developed more easily than between the binary compound BC and ABC. This pattern of differentiation is in line with a modified unique cue theory and Pearce's configural theory. Summation to ABC at the beginning of training, however, again was at odds with Pearce's configural theory. Thus, olfactory compound processing in honeybees can best be explained by a modified unique cue theory.     

Rats are sensitive to ambiguity

In the present study, we investigated response decisions made under conditions of incomplete information in rats. In Experiment 1, rats were trained on either a positive patterning (PP; A-, B-, AB+) or a negative patterning (NP; A+, B+, AB-) instrumental lever-press discrimination. Subjects that had learned an NP discrimination responded less to Cue A when Cue B was covered at test. The cover did not, however, affect test responses to Cue A in the PP condition. In Experiment 2, rats received concurrent training on both PP and NP discriminations. After concurrent training, responses to Cue A were different with B covered versus uncovered for both NP and PP discriminations. We discuss possible accounts for why exposure to a nonlinearly soluble discrimination (NP) may have affected sensitivity to cue ambiguity produced by the cover. These results have interesting implications for representational processes engaged in problem solving.     

Faces elicit different scanning patterns depending on task demands

Eye movements were recorded while participants discriminated upright and inverted faces that differed with respect to either configural or featural information. Two hypotheses were examined: (1) whether featural and configural information processing elicit different scanning patterns; (2) whether fixations on a specific region of the face dominate scanning patterns. Results from two experiments were compared to examine whether participants’ prior knowledge of the kind of information that would be relevant for the task (i.e., configural vs featural) influences eye movements. In Experiment 1, featural and configural discrimination trials were presented in random order such that participants were unaware of the information that would be relevant on any given trial. In Experiment 2, featural and configural discrimination trials were blocked and participants were informed of the nature of the discriminations. The results of both experiments suggest that faces elicit different scanning patterns depending on task demands. When participants were unaware of the nature of the information relevant for the task at hand, face processing was dominated by attention to the eyes. When participants were aware that relational information was relevant, scanning was dominated by fixations to the center of the face. We conclude that faces elicit scanning strategies that are driven by task demands.     

The power of causal beliefs and conflicting evidence on causal judgments and decision making

In two experiments, we investigated the relative impact of causal beliefs and empirical evidence on both decision making and causal judgments, and whether this relative impact could be altered by previous experience. Participants had to decide which of two alternatives would attain a higher outcome on the basis of four cues. After completing the decision task, they were asked to estimate to what extent each cue was a reliable cause of the outcome. Participants were provided with instructions that causally related two of the cues to the outcome, whereas they received neutral information about the other two cues. Two of the four cues—a causal and a neutral cue—had high validity and were both generative. The remaining two cues had low validity, and were generative in Experiment 1, but almost not related to the outcome in Experiment 2. Selected groups of participants in both experiments received pre-training with either causal or neutral cues, or no pre-training was provided. Results revealed that the impact of causal beliefs and empirical evidence depends on both the experienced pre-training and cue validity. When all cues were generative and participants received pre-training with causal cues, they mostly relied on their causal beliefs, whereas they relied on empirical evidence when they received pre-training with neutral cues. In contrast, when some of the cues were almost not related to the outcome, participants’ responses were primarily influenced by validity and—to a lesser extent—by causal beliefs. In either case, however, the influence of causal beliefs was higher in causal judgments than in decision making. While current theoretical approaches in causal learning focus either on the effect of causal beliefs or empirical evidence, the present research shows that both factors are required to explain the flexibility involved in human inferences.