Lecture 5 - Theories of Associative Learning Flashcards
What is the Bush & Mosteller (1995) error correction learning rule?
Relies on contiguity alone, not other cues
Associative strength = strength of conditioned responding
The goal of learning is to reduce predictive error
Bush & Mosteller (1955)
ΔV = (λ-V^n)
Error reduction rule: the amount that we learn on a given trial (ΔV) is equal to
the difference between what we predict will happen (V^n) and what actually
occurred (λ).
V^n+1 = V^n + ΔV^n+1
The sum of my learning (V^n+1) is equal to the current amount that I know (VI)
and the amount of learning that will occur on that trial (ΔV^n+1).
Bush & Mosteller (1995) error correction learning rule
How does the amount of learning change with number of trials?
Lots of predictive error on early trials - high learning
Little predictive error on later trials - less learning
What is the Rescorla-Wagner modification of the Bush & Mosteller learning rule?
Learning is dependent on the associative strength of all cues present during training, not just the target CS <– total error reduction
Learning rule: ΔV^n+1 = αß (λ-ΣV^n)
What does the Rescorla & Wagner (1972) model account for?
Overshadowing
Blocking
Conditioned inhibition
Overexpectation
What does the Rescorla & Wagner (1972) model not account for?
Latent inhibition
Spontaneous recovery
Retrospective revalution
What is Retrospective Revaluation?
Change in conditioned responding to a CS as a result of manipulating the associative value of an associated CS.
What is the Comparator Hypothesis?
No competition for learning (ie, association with the US)
Learning occurs based on contiguity alone.
Competition enters at time of responding (expression of learning)
Responding to the target stimulus depends on the relative associative strength of the CS and the US compared to the associative strength of other stimuli also associated with the CS and the US, which are called comparator stimuli.
The strength of the target CS-comparator CS association and the strength of the comparator CS-US association are together compared to the strength of the target CS-US association to determine responding.
What do Models of attention propose?
Effectiveness of conditioning driven, in part, by attention to the CS.
Increased attention to the CS facilitates learning about the CS
The outcome of a given trial will alter the degree of attention commanded by the CS on future trials.
Models of attention
What did Mackintosh (1975) propose?
Mackintosh (1975) proposed that attention increases to cues that are reliable predictors of the US.
Models of attention
What did Pearce & Hall (1980) propose?
Pearce & Hall (1980) proposed that attention is determined by how surprising the US was on the preceding trial. More surprising means more attention is paid on the subsequent trial.
Models of attention
What did Hogarth, Dickinson, & Duka propose?
Looking for action — attention that a stimulus commands after it has become a good predictor of the US and can generate a CR with minimal cognitive effort.
Looking for learning — attention that is involved in processing cues that are not yet good predictors of the US and therefore have much to be learned about.
Looking for liking — attention that stimuli command because of their emotional value.
What is the Temporal Coding Hypothesis?
Organisms can integrate different temporal maps with a common element
What is the Relative Waiting Time Hypothesis?
Organisms compare how long they have to wait for the US during the CS (T) relative to how long they wait for the US during the intertrial interval (l).
When the US waiting time during the CS is shorter than during the ITI, the I/ T ratio is high.
The CS becomes an informative predictor of the next occurrence of the US.
Strong responding to the CS is observed.
