Interactions between the elements of an outcome in human associative learning.

Abstract

When a cue is established as a reliable predictor of an outcome (A-O1), this cue will typically block learning between an additional cue and the same outcome if both cues are subsequently trained together (AB-O1). Three experiments sought to explore whether this effect extends to outcomes in humans using the food allergist paradigm. In all three experiments an outcome facilitation effect was observed as opposed to outcome blocking. That is, prior learning about an element of an outcome compound (A-O1) appeared to facilitate learning about a novel outcome when (A-O2) these outcomes were presented together (A-O1 O2) relative to a control stimulus that first received C-O3 trials prior to C-O1 O2 trials. In Experiment 2, however, participants were also presented with an additional set of control trials, which were presented during Stage 2 only and reliably predicted the outcome compounds. At test participants displayed more learning about these additional control trials relative to the blocked outcomes, thus displaying an outcome blocking effect alongside an outcome facilitation effect. In Experiment 3 a one-trial outcome blocking procedure was employed in order to distinguish theoretical accounts of these findings. This procedure revealed an outcome facilitation effect but not an outcome blocking effect. These results can be understood in terms of an account derived from Wagner's (1981) model. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Food Restriction in Anorexia Nervosa in the Light of Modern Learning Theory: A Narrative Review

“…Blocking [123] refers to the observation that a first conditioned stimulus (S1) that already predicts an unconditioned stimulus often reduces conditioning to a second neutral stimulus (S2) when both stimuli are paired again with the same unconditioned stimulus. When transferred, if the food cue is already acting as a S1 that predicts weight gain in AN (as suggested by Murray et al, [122], then food should block fear learning about a novel food cue (S2) when both are paired with weight gain again (see [124], for a recent demonstration and review of the blocking effect).…”

Special issue to commemorate the intellectual contributions of Allan R. Wagner.

“…Nakajima (2020) explores wheel running as a potential US in supporting flavor aversion learning and studies this from the perspective of priming and SOP theories by employing a proximal US preexposure procedure. Quigley and Haselgrove (2020) study the possibility of blocking and facilitation among outcomes in a food allergy task with humans and illustrate how SOP theory might accommodate such effects. Uengoer, Lachnit, and Pearce (2020) use a food allergy paradigm to study the redundancy effect, whereby blocked cues acquire more associative strength than do redundant cues, contrary to existing theory.…”