2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2005.02.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Primacy and recency effects in extinction and latent inhibition: A selective review with implications for models of learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
13
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
1
13
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…What is experienced first is remembered better [7][10], it drives attachment more strongly [11][13], creates stronger association with the self [14], influences impressions more decisively [15]–[18], and persuades more effectively [19]–[21].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…What is experienced first is remembered better [7][10], it drives attachment more strongly [11][13], creates stronger association with the self [14], influences impressions more decisively [15]–[18], and persuades more effectively [19]–[21].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are many examples in which behavior after ambiguous learning experiences has been shown to be dependent on the context in which the different components of training and testing have been carried out (see Pineño & Miller, 2005, for a recent review). For example, Thomas, Larsen, and Ayres (2003) found that a change of context following acquisition and extinction resulted in renewed responding, consistent with the initial acquisition phase, rather than with the extinction phase.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recent work has emphasized the distinction between causal and predictive judgments (Collins & Shanks, 2002;Matute et al, 2002), with causal judgments more likely to produce integrative judgments or primacy effects. Perhaps the key factor that will shift a judgment about relatively stable properties of the world, such as cause-effect relations, from recency to integration to primacy (Pineño & Miller, 2005) is the degree of context change that is evident between stages. Since latent inhibition and extinction are differentially sensitive to context manipulations (Experiment 3), a complex pattern across studies is to be expected.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of critical importance to the current study, the interpolation of a retention interval between counterconditioning and testing also resulted in partial recovery of the first-learned CS-US association. This effect was explained by Pineño and Miller (2005) as potentially due to an integration of the memories of conditioning and extinction, thereby resulting in an increase in responding due to the combined Biological Significance in Human Causal Learning | John and Pineño…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Preconditioned associations between hazard symbols and presumed danger levels might or might not have influenced the intensity of spontaneous recovery observed within this particular group. Pineño and Miller's (2005) comprehensive literature review alluded to Pavlov's (1927) study of phenomena such as extinction and counterconditioning (i.e., CS-US pairings followed by pairings of the CS with a different US, typically of different motivational values such as tone-shock pairings followed by tone-food pairings). Of critical importance to the current study, the interpolation of a retention interval between counterconditioning and testing also resulted in partial recovery of the first-learned CS-US association.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%