Academic Field

Psychology

Faculty Mentor Name

James Witnauer

Presentation Type

Poster Presentation

Abstract

Retrospective revaluation occurs when posttraining associative inflation or deflation of a cue results in changes in the response potential of an absent stimulus. For example, in backward blocking situations, Phase 1 AX+ followed by Phase 2 A+ trials result in weaker responding to X at test than a comparable control cue. Relatedly, cue competition involves reduced learning when cues are trained together than when they are trained separately. For example, in forward blocking, A+ before AX+ trials reduce learning about X. In both cue competition and retrospective revaluation, animals may learn about and respond based on direct associations with the outcome (e.g., X-outcome associations) or within-compound e.g., X-A) associations. Attempts to reveal the role of within-compound associations in cue competition and retrospective revaluation have produced divergent conclusions. Towards resolving these discrepancies in the literature, we conducted computer simulations of models that varied in their treatment of within-compound associations in cue competition and retrospective revaluation. Our simulations revealed that a model that uses within-compound associations in both retrospective revaluation and in conventional cue competition is able to explain the central results as well as models that assume a selective role for within-compound associations in retrospective revaluation.

Keywords

learning

Start Date

10-4-2015 11:15 AM

End Date

10-4-2015 12:00 PM

Location

SERC House of Fields

Share

COinS
 
Apr 10th, 11:15 AM Apr 10th, 12:00 PM

Within-compound associations in cue competition and retrosepective revaluation

SERC House of Fields

Retrospective revaluation occurs when posttraining associative inflation or deflation of a cue results in changes in the response potential of an absent stimulus. For example, in backward blocking situations, Phase 1 AX+ followed by Phase 2 A+ trials result in weaker responding to X at test than a comparable control cue. Relatedly, cue competition involves reduced learning when cues are trained together than when they are trained separately. For example, in forward blocking, A+ before AX+ trials reduce learning about X. In both cue competition and retrospective revaluation, animals may learn about and respond based on direct associations with the outcome (e.g., X-outcome associations) or within-compound e.g., X-A) associations. Attempts to reveal the role of within-compound associations in cue competition and retrospective revaluation have produced divergent conclusions. Towards resolving these discrepancies in the literature, we conducted computer simulations of models that varied in their treatment of within-compound associations in cue competition and retrospective revaluation. Our simulations revealed that a model that uses within-compound associations in both retrospective revaluation and in conventional cue competition is able to explain the central results as well as models that assume a selective role for within-compound associations in retrospective revaluation.