University of New South Wales, School of Psychology.
J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2024 Apr;50(2):77-98. doi: 10.1037/xan0000375.
Rescorla (2000, 2001) interpreted his compound test results to show that both common and individual error terms regulate associative change such that the element of a conditioned compound with the greater prediction error undergoes greater associative change than the one with the smaller prediction error. However, it has recently been suggested that uncertainty, not prediction error, is the primary determinant of associative change in people (Spicer et al., 2020, 2022). The current experiments use the compound test in a continuous outcome allergist task to assess the role of uncertainty in associative change, using two different manipulations of uncertainty: outcome uncertainty (where participants are uncertain of the level of the outcome on a particular trial) and causal uncertainty (where participants are uncertain of the contribution of the cue to the level of the outcome). We replicate Rescorla's compound test results in the case of both associative gains (Experiment 1) and associative losses (Experiment 3) and then provide evidence for greater change to more uncertain cues in the case of associative gains (Experiments 2 and 4), but not associative losses (Experiments 3 and 5). We discuss the findings in terms of the notion of theory protection advanced by Spicer et al., and other ways of thinking about the compound test procedure, such as that proposed by Holmes et al. (2019). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
雷斯考拉(2000、2001)解释他的复合测试结果表明,共同和个体误差项都调节联想变化,使得具有较大预测误差的条件复合元素经历的联想变化大于具有较小预测误差的元素。然而,最近有人认为,不确定性而不是预测误差是人们联想变化的主要决定因素(Spicer 等人,2020、2022)。当前的实验使用连续结果过敏症任务中的复合测试来评估不确定性在联想变化中的作用,使用两种不同的不确定性操纵:结果不确定性(参与者在特定试验中不确定结果的水平)和因果不确定性(参与者不确定线索对结果水平的贡献)。我们在联想增益(实验 1)和联想损失(实验 3)的情况下复制了雷斯考拉的复合测试结果,然后在联想增益的情况下(实验 2 和 4)为更不确定的线索提供了更大变化的证据,但在联想损失的情况下(实验 3 和 5)则没有。我们根据 Spicer 等人提出的理论保护概念以及其他思考复合测试程序的方式(例如 Holmes 等人提出的方式)来讨论这些发现。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2024 APA,保留所有权利)。