title: Two mechanisms of human contingency learning.
abstract: How do humans learn contingencies between events? Both pathway-strengthening and inference-based process models have been proposed to explain contingency learning. We propose that each of these processes is used in different conditions. Participants viewed displays that contained single or paired objects and learned which displays were usually followed by the appearance of a dot. Some participants predicted whether the dot would appear before seeing the outcome, whereas other participants were required to respond quickly if the dot appeared shortly after the display. In the prediction task, instructions guiding participants to infer which objects caused the dot to appear were necessary in order for contingencies associated with one object to influence participants' predictions about the object with which it had been paired. In the response task, contingencies associated with one object affected responses to its pair mate irrespective of whether or not participants were given causal instructions. Our results challenge single-mechanism accounts of contingency learning and suggest that the mechanisms underlying performance in the two tasks are distinct.
authors.affiliation: Jordan Hall, Building 420, Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. sternberg@stanford.edu
authors.forename: Daniel A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Sternberg
authors.forename: James L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: McClelland
mesh_terms: D001245:Association Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D003463:Cues; D006801:Humans; D011597:Psychomotor Performance / Q000502:physiology*; D011930:Reaction Time