Seabrooke Tina, Hogarth Lee, Edmunds C E R, Mitchell Chris J
School of Psychology, University of Plymouth.
School of Psychology, University of Exeter.
J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2019 Jan;45(1):95-101. doi: 10.1037/xan0000191.
The current article concerns human outcome-selective Pavlovian-instrumental transfer (PIT), where Pavlovian cues selectively invigorate instrumental responses that predict common rewarding outcomes. Several recent experiments have observed PIT effects that were insensitive to outcome devaluation manipulations, which has been taken as evidence of an automatic "associative" mechanism. Other similar studies observed PIT effects that were sensitive to devaluation, which suggests a more controlled, goal-directed process. Studies supporting the automatic approach have been criticized for using a biased baseline, whereas studies supporting the goal-directed approach have been criticized for priming multiple outcomes at test. The current experiment addressed both of these issues. Participants first learned to perform two instrumental responses to earn two outcomes each (R1-O1/O3, R2-O2/O4), before four Pavlovian stimuli (S1-S4) were trained to predict each outcome. One outcome that was paired with each instrumental response (O3 and O4) was then devalued, so that baseline response choice at test would be balanced. Instrumental responding was then assessed in the presence of each individual Pavlovian stimulus, so that only one outcome was primed per trial. PIT effects were observed for the valued outcomes (ts > 3.96, ps < .001) but not for the devalued outcomes (F < 1, Bayes Factor10 = .29). Hence, when baseline response choice was equated and only one outcome was primed per test trial, PIT was sensitive to outcome devaluation. The data therefore support goal-directed models of PIT. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
本文关注的是人类结果选择性巴甫洛夫式工具性转移(PIT),即巴甫洛夫式线索选择性地增强那些预测共同奖励结果的工具性反应。最近的一些实验观察到了对结果贬值操作不敏感的PIT效应,这被视为自动“联想”机制的证据。其他类似研究则观察到了对贬值敏感的PIT效应,这表明存在一个更受控制的、目标导向的过程。支持自动方法的研究因使用有偏差的基线而受到批评,而支持目标导向方法的研究则因在测试中启动多个结果而受到批评。当前的实验解决了这两个问题。参与者首先学习执行两种工具性反应,每种反应可获得两种结果(R1 - O1/O3,R2 - O2/O4),然后对四个巴甫洛夫式刺激(S1 - S4)进行训练,使其预测每个结果。随后,将与每种工具性反应配对的一个结果(O3和O4)贬值,以便测试时的基线反应选择能够平衡。然后在每个单独的巴甫洛夫式刺激出现时评估工具性反应,这样每次试验只启动一个结果。对于有价值的结果观察到了PIT效应(t > 3.96,p < .001),而对于贬值的结果则未观察到(F <