a University of Queensland , Australia.
Cogn Emot. 2005 Feb 1;19(2):269-82. doi: 10.1080/02699930441000319.
Dual process accounts of affective learning state that the learning of likes and dislikes reflects a learning mechanism that is distinct from the one reflected in expectancy learning, the learning of signal relationships, and has different empirical characteristics. Affective learning, for example, is said not to be affected by: (a) extinction training; (b) occasion setting; (c) cue competition; and (d) awareness of the CS-US contingencies. These predictions were tested in a series of experiments that employed simple Pavlovian conditioning procedures. Neutral visual pictures of geometric shapes, or tactile conditional stimuli (CS) were paired with aversive electrotactile unconditional stimuli (US). Dependent measures were physiological (skin conductance, blink startle modulation) or verbal (US expectancy, on-line and off-line ratings of CS pleasantness). Different combinations of these dependent measures were employed across different experiments in an attempt to assess affective and expectancy learning simultaneously. Changes in CS pleasantness as indexed by ratings or blink startle modulation were readily observed. However, contrary to the predictions from dual-process accounts, results indicated that acquired CS unpleasantness is subject to extinction, occasion setting, cue competition, and not found in absence of CS-US contingency awareness.
双过程理论解释了情感学习状态，即喜欢和不喜欢的学习反映了一种不同于期望学习（信号关系的学习）的学习机制，并且具有不同的经验特征。例如，情感学习据说不受以下因素的影响：（a）消褪训练；（b）情境设定；（c）线索竞争；以及（d）对 CS-US 关联的意识。这些预测在一系列采用简单的巴甫洛夫条件反射程序的实验中得到了检验。中性的几何形状视觉图片或触觉条件刺激（CS）与令人不快的电触觉无条件刺激（US）配对。生理指标（皮肤电导、眨眼惊跳调制）或言语指标（US 预期、CS 愉悦性的在线和离线评分）被用于不同的实验中，以尝试同时评估情感和期望学习。通过评分或眨眼惊跳调制来衡量 CS 愉悦度的变化很容易观察到。然而，与双过程理论的预测相反，结果表明，习得的 CS 不愉快会受到消褪、情境设定、线索竞争的影响，并且在没有 CS-US 关联意识的情况下不会出现。
