Is the devil in the detail? Evidence for S-S learning after unconditional stimulus revaluation in human evaluative conditioning under a broader set of experimental conditions

Whether valence change during evaluative conditioning is mediated by a link between the conditional stimulus (CS) and the unconditional stimulus (US; S-S learning) or between the CS and the unconditional response (S-R learning) is a matter of continued debate. Changing the valence of the US after conditioning, known as US revaluation, can be used to dissociate these accounts. Changes in CS valence after US revaluation provide evidence for S-S learning but if CS valence does not change, evidence for S-R learning is found. Support for S-S learning has been provided by most past revaluation studies, but typically the CS and US have been from the same stimulus category, the task instructions have suggested that judgements of the CS should be based on the US, and USs have been mildly valenced stimuli. These factors may bias the results in favour of S-S learning. We examined whether S-R learning would be evident when CSs and USs were taken from different categories, the task instructions were removed, and more salient USs were used. US revaluation was found to influence explicit US evaluations and explicit and implicit CS evaluations, supporting an S-S learning account and suggesting that past results are stable across procedural changes.     

Both trace and delay conditioning of evaluative responses depend on contingency awareness

Whereas previous evaluative conditioning (EC) studies produced inconsistent results concerning the role of contingency knowledge, there are classical eye-blink conditioning studies suggesting that declarative processes are involved in trace conditioning but not in delay conditioning. In two EC experiments pairing neutral sounds (conditioned stimuli; CSs) with affective pictures (unconditioned stimuli; USs), we tested whether the type of conditioning procedure affects the relationship between awareness and EC. Auditory CSs and visual USs were either overlapping and co-terminating (Delay Conditioning Group), or they were separated by a short temporal gap (Trace Conditioning Group). In both groups, contingency awareness was manipulated by varying the duration at which the US was presented during conditioning. Furthermore, in addition to a post-conditioning measure of awareness, US detectability was measured concurrently during the learning phase in Experiment 2. US exposure duration affected both measures of awareness. The data of both experiments demonstrate that EC does not occur if the USs are presented at very brief durations, but reliable EC effects can be observed at longer US exposure durations. As there were no differences between trace and delay conditioning, the data suggest that contingency awareness plays a crucial role in trace and in delay conditioning of evaluative responses. These results challenge automatic association-formation accounts of EC, but they are in line with ‘single-process’ accounts assuming EC to be dependent on conscious declarative knowledge about CS–US contingencies.     

Evaluative conditioning without directly experienced pairings of the conditioned and the unconditioned stimuli

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is the valence change of a stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) that is due to the previous pairing with another stimulus (unconditioned stimulus, US). We investigated whether EC can occur also when the CS-US pairings are not experienced directly by the participant but are implied by other events that the participant encounters. In two experiments, positive USs were presented in some trials and negative USs in other trials. Afterwards, participants were given information from which it was possible to conclude that CSs were covertly present during these trials. Finally, the valence of these CSs was registered using both implicit (Implicit Association Test, affective priming) and explicit measures (valence ratings). In line with the assumption that EC effects can be based on CS-US pairings that are not directly experienced, the valence of the CSs changed in the direction of the US with which they were covertly paired. This effect was observed both on explicit and on implicit measures. We argue that several aspects of our results are in line with propositional models of EC and fit less well with association formation models.     

Analyzing the random control procedure: Effects of paired and unpaired CSs and USs on autoshaping the chick's key peck with heat reinforcement

A series of five experiments using a total of 264 subjects investigated the effects of paired and unpaired key light (CS) and heat (US) stimuli on autoshaping the chick's key peck. Experiment 1 established that paired presentations of CS and US promoted a more rapid rise in key pecking than did randomly presented CSs and USs and that the specific sequence of stimuli under the random control procedure affected key pecking performance. Experiment 2 used a trace conditioning procedure to determine the role of the CS-US interval on autoshaping and to define empirically unpaired CSs and USs. Key pecking declined as the trace delay interval was increased from 0 to 25 sec; at 25 sec, no conditioning of key pecking occurred. Experiments 3–5 assessed the effects on autoshaped key pecking of (a) number of daily CS-US pairings, (b) added unpaired CS presentations, and (c) added unpaired US presentations, since paired and random control schedules differed in all of these respects. Reduction in the number of CS-US pairings slowed the acquisition of key pecking as did the concurrent addition of nonreinforced CSs and unsignaled USs. These results support theories of association formation that stress the effects of both paired and unpaired CSs and USs.     

Changing CS features alters evaluative responses in evaluative conditioning

Evaluative conditioning (EC) refers to changes in people's evaluative responses toward initially neutral stimuli (CSs) by mere spatial and temporal contiguity with other positive or negative stimuli (USs). We investigate whether changing CS features from conditioning to evaluation also changes people's evaluative response toward these CSs. We used computer-generated male faces as CSs and paired them with other positively or negatively evaluated faces. When participants evaluated the CS faces, they either appeared unchanged, with glasses, with beards, or glasses and beards. Unchanged faces showed a clear conditioning effect, while all other face versions showed no significant conditioning effects. The conditioning effect also depended on participants’ awareness of a CS's respective US. These results mirror configural explanations of stimulus generalization in classical conditioning, with implications for EC as explanation for attitude acquisition and learning of likes and dislikes in everyday life.     

Using the Implicit Association Test does not rule out an impact of conscious propositional knowledge on evaluative conditioning

Implicit measures such as the Implicit Association Test (IAT) have recently become popular as tools in research on evaluative conditioning. The reason is that these measures are thought to be impervious to changes in valence that are due to conscious propositional knowledge about the relation between the conditioned stimulus (CS) and the unconditioned stimulus (US). I present data that raise doubts about the validity of this assumption. In two experiments, attitudes towards CSs as measured by the IAT were in line with instructed CS-US contingencies even though the CSs and USs were never actually paired. The results therefore suggest that IAT effects can be biassed by conscious propositional knowledge.     

One but not the same: Evaluative conditioning with mixed-valence USs

In evaluative conditioning (EC), the pairing of a positively or negatively valenced stimulus (US) with another neutral stimulus (CS) leads to a corresponding change in liking of the CS. EC research so far has concentrated on using unambiguously positive or negative USs. However, attitude objects often possess multiple features that can be positive and negative at the same time. The present research addresses the question of how EC is affected by using such mixed-valence stimuli as USs. In two studies, USs of mixed valence (i.e., positive behavior and membership in a negative group or vice versa) were paired with affectively neutral CSs. Interestingly, results showed that the mixed-valence USs were evaluated according to the valence of the behavioral information. In contrast, the evaluation of associated CSs was more strongly influenced by the valence of the group information that was presented about the USs. Possible explanations as well as implications for EC research are discussed.     

What you see is what will change: evaluative conditioning effects depend on a focus on valence

This study investigated whether evaluative conditioning (EC) effects depend on an evaluative focus during the learning phase. An EC effect is a valence change of an originally neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus or CS) that is due to the former pairing with a positive or negative stimulus (unconditioned stimulus or US). In three experiments, the task focus during the conditioning phase was manipulated. Participants judged CS-US pairings either with respect to their valence or with respect to another stimulus dimension. EC effects on explicit and implicit measures were found when valence was task relevant but not when the non-valent stimulus dimension was task relevant. Two accounts for the valence focus effect are proposed: (1) An additional direct learning of the relation of CS and evaluative responses in the valence focus condition, or (2) a stronger activation of US valence in the valence focus condition compared to the non-valent focus condition.     

Evaluative conditioning without directly experienced pairings of the conditioned and the unconditioned stimuli

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is the valence change of a stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) that is due to the previous pairing with another stimulus (unconditioned stimulus, US). We investigated whether EC can occur also when the CS–US pairings are not experienced directly by the participant but are implied by other events that the participant encounters. In two experiments, positive USs were presented in some trials and negative USs in other trials. Afterwards, participants were given information from which it was possible to conclude that CSs were covertly present during these trials. Finally, the valence of these CSs was registered using both implicit (Implicit Association Test, affective priming) and explicit measures (valence ratings). In line with the assumption that EC effects can be based on CS–US pairings that are not directly experienced, the valence of the CSs changed in the direction of the US with which they were covertly paired. This effect was observed both on explicit and on implicit measures. We argue that several aspects of our results are in line with propositional models of EC and fit less well with association formation models.     

Extinction of likes and dislikes: effects of feature-specific attention allocation

The evaluative conditioning (EC) effect refers to the change in the liking of a neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) due to its pairing with another stimulus (unconditioned stimulus, US). We examined whether the extinction rate of the EC effect is moderated by feature-specific attention allocation. In two experiments, CSs were abstract Gabor patches varying along two orthogonal, perceptual dimensions (i.e. spatial frequency and orientation). During the acquisition phase, one of these dimensions was predictive of the valence of the USs. During the extinction phase, CSs were presented alone and participants were asked to categorise the CSs either according to their valence, the perceptual dimension that was task-relevant during the acquisition phase, or a perceptual dimension that was task-irrelevant during the acquisition phase. As predicted, explicit valence measures revealed a linear increase in the extinction rate of the EC effect as participants were encouraged to assign attention to non-evaluative stimulus information during the extinction phase. In Experiment 1, Affect Misattribution Paradigm (AMP) data mimicked this pattern of results, although the effect just missed conventional levels of significance. In Experiment 2, the AMP data revealed an increase of the EC effect if attention was focused on evaluative stimulus information. Potential mechanisms to explain these findings are discussed.     

Event representation in Pavlovian conditioning: image and action

In a typical Pavlovian conditioning experiment, a relatively insignificant event, the conditioned stimulus (CS), is paired with a biologically more meaningful event, the unconditioned stimulus (US). As a consequence of those pairings, the CS is thought to acquire response characteristics of the US. In this article I describe experiments with rats that suggest that under some circumstances, the CS acquires control of perceptual processing of the US, in the absence of that US itself. I present three kinds of evidence for this surrogate processing, which I liken to imagery or hallucination: (1) CSs come to control specific, sensory-evaluative responses normally evoked only by the USs; (2) CSs can substitute for USs in the establishment of new learning about those USs themselves; (3) CSs can substitute for USs in the modulation of conditioning to other events, either overshadowing (interfering) or potentiating learning, in the same manner as the USs themselves. Finally, I compare these data with evidence for conditioned sensation and imagery in humans, and suggest that imagery may be a very basic process, evolutionarily derived from perceptual and conditioning processes adapted to deal with remote or absent objects.     

评价性条件反射效应：无条件刺激的呈现时长、效价强度与关联意识的作用

以真实商标图案为条件刺激, 情绪图片为无条件刺激, 探索无条件刺激呈现时长、效价强度与关联意识对评价性条件反射效应的影响。实验通过结合四图再认测验与基于项目分析, 对关联意识的作用进行了详细探讨。结果表明, 评价性条件反射效应只发生在无条件刺激长呈现水平与无条件刺激强效价水平; 评价性条件反射效应的产生需要基于被试的关联意识。关联意识在呈现时长(效价强度)与评价性条件反射效应间的中介作用不显著。结果不支持评价性条件反射的内隐错误归因机制及联想-命题评价模型的相关论断, 部分支持命题性解释模型。     

Is evaluative conditioning really resistant to extinction? Evidence for changes in evaluative judgements without changes in evaluative representations

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is defined as the change in the evaluation of a conditioned stimulus (CS) due to its pairing with a positive or negative unconditioned stimulus (US). Although several individual studies suggest that EC is unaffected by unreinforced presentations of the CS without the US, a recent meta-analysis indicates that EC effects are less pronounced for post-extinction measurements than post-acquisition measurements. The disparity in research findings suggests that extinction of EC may depend on yet unidentified conditions. In an attempt to uncover these conditions, three experiments (N = 784) investigated the influence of unreinforced post-acquisition CS presentations on EC effects resulting from simultaneous versus sequential pairings and pairings with single versus multiple USs. For all four types of CS–US pairings, EC effects on self-reported evaluations were reduced by unreinforced CS presentations, but only when the CSs had been rated after the initial presentation of CS–US pairings. EC effects on an evaluative priming measure remained unaffected by unreinforced CS presentations regardless of whether the CSs had been rated after acquisition. The results suggest that reduced EC effects resulting from unreinforced CS presentations are due to judgement-related processes during the verbal expression of CS evaluations rather than genuine changes in the underlying evaluative representations.     

Effect of signaling intertrial unconditioned stimuli in autoshaping

Context-unconditioned-stimulus (US) associations have been suggested as the mediator of the response decrement that occurs when extra USs are added to the intertrial intervals (ITIs) of an otherwise standard Pavlovian conditioning situation. The present autoshaping experiments were concerned with the effect of signaling those extra USs, since such signaling might be expected to lessen their ability to condition the context. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that signaling the ITI USs did reduce their detrimental effects on responding to the conditioned stimulus (CS). To determine whether that reduction was due to an impact of signaling on the target-CS-US association or on performance to the target-CS, Experiment 3 examined responding to differentially trained CSs in a common context, as well as responding to identically trained CSs in differentially trained contexts. Whether the CS was tested in a context of relatively high or low associative strength, more responding occurred to the CS trained with signaled, as compared with unsignaled, ITI USs; further, there was more responding to that CS in the more highly valued context. The pattern of results suggests that contextual value does interact with CS-US learning and may also affect performance to the CS.     

The impact of arbitrarily applicable relational responding on evaluative learning about hypothetical money and shock outcomes

Evaluative learning comprises changes in preferences after co-occurrences between conditioned stimuli (CSs) and an unconditioned stimulus (US) of affective value. Co-occurrences may involve relational responding. Two experiments examined the impact of arbitrary relational responding on evaluative preferences for hypothetical money and shock outcomes. In Experiment 1, participants were trained to make arbitrary relational responses by placing CSs of the same size but different colours into boxes and were then instructed that these CSs represented different intensities of hypothetical USs (money or shock). Liking ratings of the CSs were altered in accordance with the underlying bigger/smaller than relations. A reversal of preference was also observed: the CS associated with the smallest hypothetical shock was rated more positively than the CS associated with the smallest amount of hypothetical money. In Experiment 2, procedures from Relational Frame Theory (RFT) established a relational network of more than/less than relations consisting of five CSs (A-B-C-D-E). Overall, evaluative preferences were altered, but not reversed, depending on (a) how stimuli had been related to one another during the learning phase and (b) whether those stimuli referred to money or shocks. The contribution of RFT to evaluative learning research is discussed.     

Aware and (dis)liking: item-based analyses reveal that valence acquisition via evaluative conditioning emerges only when there is contingency awareness

Evaluative conditioning (EC) refers to changes in the liking of an affectively neutral stimulus (the conditioned stimulus, or CS) following the pairing of that stimulus with another stimulus of affective value (the unconditioned stimulus, or US). In 3 experiments, the authors assessed contingency awareness, that is, awareness of the CS-US associations, by relying on participants' responses to individual items rather than using a global method of assessment. They found that EC emerged on contingency aware CSs only. Of note, whether the CSs were evaluated explicitly (Experiments 1 and 2) or implicitly (Experiment 3) did not make a difference. This pattern supports the idea that awareness of the CS-US associations may be required for valence acquisition via EC.     

US habituation,like CS extinction,produces a decrement in conditioned fear responding that is NMDA dependent and subject to renewal and reinstatement

Just as fear can be learned, it can also be inhibited. The most common way of reducing learned fear is through extinction, where the conditioned stimulus (CS) previously paired with an aversive unconditioned stimulus (US) is repeatedly presented on its own. Another, much less commonly studied, way to inhibit learned fear is by habituating, or devaluing, the US. In this procedure, fear responding to a CS is reduced by repeatedly presenting the US in the absence of the CS following the conditioning phase. The purpose of the present study was to directly compare the effects of US habituation and CS extinction on a learned fear response (freezing). Experiment 1 demonstrated that US habituation given either after (Experiment 1A) or before (Experiment 1B) fear conditioning reduced freezing to the CS at test. We then showed that the reduction in freezing resulting from either US habituation or CS extinction was context-specific (i.e., a change in context led to a renewal of the learned fear response; Experiment 2) and, furthermore, was attenuated when a pre-test shock was given (i.e., reinstatement of fear was observed in both cases; Experiment 3). Finally, Experiment 4 demonstrated that an injection of the NMDA antagonist MK-801 prior to US habituation impaired long-term retention of the learning that takes place during this procedure. Together, these results suggest that the decrement in conditioned fear responses produced by US habituation and CS extinction could rely on overlapping processes.     

Evaluative conditioning effects are modulated by the nature of contextual pairings

Across two studies participants completed a learning phase comprised of two types of trials: context pairing trials in which two (valenced or non-valenced) words were identical or opposite to one another and evaluative conditioning (EC) trials in which a CS was paired with a US. Based on the idea that EC occurs because CS-US pairings function as a symbolic cue about the relation between the CS and the US, we hypothesised that the nature of context pairings (identical or opposite) might moderate EC effects. Results indicate that identity-based context pairs led to typical assimilative explicit and implicit effects whereas opposition-based pairs led to attenuated effects. Implications and different accounts of our findings are discussed.     

What you see is what will change: Evaluative conditioning effects depend on a focus on valence

This study investigated whether evaluative conditioning (EC) effects depend on an evaluative focus during the learning phase. An EC effect is a valence change of an originally neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus or CS) that is due to the former pairing with a positive or negative stimulus (unconditioned stimulus or US). In three experiments, the task focus during the conditioning phase was manipulated. Participants judged CS–US pairings either with respect to their valence or with respect to another stimulus dimension. EC effects on explicit and implicit measures were found when valence was task relevant but not when the non-valent stimulus dimension was task relevant. Two accounts for the valence focus effect are proposed: (1) An additional direct learning of the relation of CS and evaluative responses in the valence focus condition, or (2) a stronger activation of US valence in the valence focus condition compared to the non-valent focus condition.     

On the intentional control of conditioned evaluative responses

The evaluative conditioning (EC) effect is defined as a change in the evaluation of a conditioned stimulus (CS) due to its pairing with a valenced unconditioned stimulus (US). The current research investigated the controllability of EC effects by asking participants to either promote or prevent the influence of CS–US pairings before they provided evaluative ratings of the CS. Experiment 1 showed that instructions to maximize or minimize the influence of CS–US pairings moderated EC effects in line with task instructions. However, this moderation was observed only when participants were able to recall the valence of the US that had been paired with a given CS. When participants failed to remember the valence of the US, significant EC effects emerged regardless of control instructions. Experiment 2 tested whether the influence of CS–US pairings on CS evaluations can be intentionally reversed. The results showed that reversal instructions led to a reverse EC effect when participants were able to recall the valence of the US that had been paired with a given CS, but not when they were unable to recall the valence of the US. Taken together, these results suggest that US valence memory is a necessary precondition for controlling the expression of a conditioned evaluative response, but it is not a necessary precondition for the emergence of EC effects per se.