Interference between cues requires a causal scenario: Favorable evidence for causal reasoning models in learning processes.
In an interference-between-cues design (IbC), the expression of a learned Cue A-Outcome 1 association has been shown to be impaired if another cue, B, is separately paired with the same outcome in a second learning phase. The present study examined whether IbC could be caused by associative mechanis...
| Publicado en: | Learning & Motivation Vol. 39; no. 3; pp. 196 - 209 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Academic Press Inc.
August 2008
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=508082638&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 508082638 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00239690 LMO jtl: Learning & Motivation issn: 00239690 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: August 2008 vid: 39 iid: 3 pid: 735 pub: Academic Press Inc. artinfo: ui: 508082638 10.1016/j.lmot.2007.10.001 ppf: 196 ppct: 13 formats: tig: atl: Interference between cues requires a causal scenario: Favorable evidence for causal reasoning models in learning processes. aug: au: Luque, David Cobos, Pedro L. López, Francisco J. su: Causation (Philosophy) Reasoning Cognitive interference Psychology of learning sug: subj: Causation (Philosophy) Reasoning Cognitive interference Psychology of learning ab: In an interference-between-cues design (IbC), the expression of a learned Cue A-Outcome 1 association has been shown to be impaired if another cue, B, is separately paired with the same outcome in a second learning phase. The present study examined whether IbC could be caused by associative mechanisms independent of causal reasoning processes. This was achieved by testing participants in two different learning situations. In the Causal Scenario condition, participants learned in a diagnostic situation in which a common cause (Outcome 1) caused two disjoint effects, namely Cues A and B. In the Non-Causal Scenario condition, the same IbC design and stimulus conditions were used. However, instructions provided no causal frame to make sense of how cues and outcomes were related. IbC was only found in the Causal Scenario condition. This result is consistent with Causal Reasoning Models of causal learning and raises important difficulties for associative explanations of IbC. Copyright (c) 2008 Elsevier Inc. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|