Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 2-3/2004

01-04-2004 | Original Article

Contiguity and contingency in action-effect learning

Auteurs: Birgit Elsner, Bernhard Hommel

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 2-3/2004

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

According to the two-stage model of voluntary action, the ability to perform voluntary action is acquired in two sequential steps. Firstly, associations are acquired between representations of movements and of the effects that frequently follow them. Secondly, the anticipation or perception of an acquired action effect primes the movement that has been learnt to produce this effect; the acquired action-effect associations thus mediate the selection of actions that are most appropriate to achieve an intended action goal. If action-effect learning has an associative basis, it should be influenced by factors that are known to affect instrumental learning, such as the temporal contiguity and the probabilistic contingency of movement and effect. In two experiments, the contiguity or the contingency between key presses and subsequent tones was manipulated in various ways. As expected, both factors affected the acquisition of action-effect relations as assessed by the potency of action effects to prime the corresponding action in a later behavioral test. In particular, evidence of action-effect associations was obtained only if the effect of the action was delayed for no more than 1 s, if the effect appeared more often in the presence than in the absence of the action, or if action and effect were entirely uncorrelated but the effect appeared very often. These findings support the assumption that the control of voluntary actions is based on action-effect representations that are acquired by associative learning mechanisms.
Voetnoten
1
At first sight, causality ratings may seem to be more related to classical conditioning than to instrumental learning. Indeed, just like causal judgments, classical conditioning is about the relationship of, and the resulting association between two events, such as a perceived cause and a perceived effect. That such an association may be the basis for our perception of causality was the core of Hume’s (1739/1964) approach. In contrast, original interpretations of instrumental learning did not assume that the effect of an action is actually learned; instead, an effect was claimed to only signal whether the response producing it is to be learned or strengthened (e.g., Thorndike, 1927). Thus, the original concept of instrumental learning treats action effects as merely providing the “glue” needed to associate responses and the stimuli preceding them (Walker, 1969) but not as elements of the resulting memory trace (Hommel, 1998). However, more recent studies have shown that even animals acquire knowledge about the content of action-effect relations (Brogden, 1962; Meck, 1985; Rescorla, 1992; Trapold, 1970; Urcuioli & DeMarse, 1996; for an overview, see Elsner & Hommel, 2001), which lends credit to Tolman, Hall, and Bretnall’s (1932) view of action effects as information to be integrated, i.e., knowledge about action effects may well become a part of an action’s representation (Hommel, 1998), which again may underlie our ability to perceive that action as causing the effect (Haggard, Aschersleben, Gehrke, & Prinz, 2002). However, even though we tend to relate action-effect learning more to instrumental learning than to classical conditioning, nothing in our conclusions depends on this preference.
 
2
It may be a concern that asking participants to attend to the action-effect relationship may have rendered the learning more “explicit” than in Experiment 1 and, thus, may have engaged a different learning mechanism. We have no evidence that would support this consideration. Firstly, Hommel, Alonso, and Fuentes (2001) investigated action-effect learning under an “implicit” instruction in a large sample and sorted their participants according to whether they were able or were not able to recall the response-effect mapping of the learning phase after the test phase. There was no evidence that learning was any different in these two groups, suggesting that the impact of action-effect associations does not depend on, and is not even modified by, explicit knowledge. (We made the same observation in a number of pilot studies where we systematically manipulated the emphasis given to the action-effect relation.) Secondly, if an “explicit” instruction would really engage a different, more intentional learning mechanism, this would be expected to increase the correlation between the consistency effects and the causality judgments; and yet, we will see that this correlation is anything but impressive. Thirdly, we will see that the effective conditions in Experiment 2 produced effects that are very comparable in size to the effects obtained in Experiment 1, which does also not support the assumption that different learning mechanisms were at work.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Allan, L. G. (1980). A note on measurement of contingency between two binary variables in judgment task. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 15, 147–149. Allan, L. G. (1980). A note on measurement of contingency between two binary variables in judgment task. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 15, 147–149.
go back to reference Allan, L. G. (1993). Human contingency judgments: Rule based or associative? Psychological Bulletin, 114, 435–448.CrossRefPubMed Allan, L. G. (1993). Human contingency judgments: Rule based or associative? Psychological Bulletin, 114, 435–448.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Allan, L. G. & Jenkins, H. M. (1980). The judgment of contingency and the nature of the response alternatives. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34, 1–11. Allan, L. G. & Jenkins, H. M. (1980). The judgment of contingency and the nature of the response alternatives. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34, 1–11.
go back to reference Beckers, T., De Houwer, J., & Eelen, P. (2002). Automatic integration of non-perceptual action effect features: The case of the associative affective Simon effect. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung, 66, 166–173.CrossRefPubMed Beckers, T., De Houwer, J., & Eelen, P. (2002). Automatic integration of non-perceptual action effect features: The case of the associative affective Simon effect. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung, 66, 166–173.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Brogden, W. J. (1962). Contiguous conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 172–176.PubMed Brogden, W. J. (1962). Contiguous conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 172–176.PubMed
go back to reference Chatlosh, D. L., Neunaber, D. J., & Wasserman, E. A. (1985). Response-outcome contingency: Behavioral and judgmental effects of appetitive and aversive outcomes with college students. Learning and Motivation, 16, 1–34. Chatlosh, D. L., Neunaber, D. J., & Wasserman, E. A. (1985). Response-outcome contingency: Behavioral and judgmental effects of appetitive and aversive outcomes with college students. Learning and Motivation, 16, 1–34.
go back to reference Davey, G. C. L. (1983). An associative view of human classical conditioning. In G. C. L. Davey (Ed.), Animal models of human behavior (pp. 95–114). Chichester: Wiley. Davey, G. C. L. (1983). An associative view of human classical conditioning. In G. C. L. Davey (Ed.), Animal models of human behavior (pp. 95–114). Chichester: Wiley.
go back to reference Dickinson, A., & Charnock, D. J. (1985). Contingency effects with maintained instrumental reinforcement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37B, 397–416. Dickinson, A., & Charnock, D. J. (1985). Contingency effects with maintained instrumental reinforcement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37B, 397–416.
go back to reference Dickinson, A., & Shanks, D. R. (1985). Animal conditioning and human causality judgment. In L.-G. Nilsson & T. Archer (Eds.), Perspectives on learning and memory (pp. 167–191). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Dickinson, A., & Shanks, D. R. (1985). Animal conditioning and human causality judgment. In L.-G. Nilsson & T. Archer (Eds.), Perspectives on learning and memory (pp. 167–191). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Einhorn, H. J., & Hogarth, R. M. (1986). Judging probable cause. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 3–19.CrossRef Einhorn, H. J., & Hogarth, R. M. (1986). Judging probable cause. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 3–19.CrossRef
go back to reference Elsner, B., & Aschersleben, G. (in press). Do I get what you get? Learning about the effects of self-performed and observed actions in infancy. Consciousness & Cognition. Elsner, B., & Aschersleben, G. (in press). Do I get what you get? Learning about the effects of self-performed and observed actions in infancy. Consciousness & Cognition.
go back to reference Elsner, B., & Hommel, B. (2001). Effect anticipation and action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 229–240. Elsner, B., & Hommel, B. (2001). Effect anticipation and action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 229–240.
go back to reference Elsner, B., Hommel, B., Mentschel, C., Drzezga, A., Prinz, W., Conrad, B., & Siebner, H.R. (2002). Linking actions and their perceivable consequences in the human brain. NeuroImage, 17, 364–372.PubMed Elsner, B., Hommel, B., Mentschel, C., Drzezga, A., Prinz, W., Conrad, B., & Siebner, H.R. (2002). Linking actions and their perceivable consequences in the human brain. NeuroImage, 17, 364–372.PubMed
go back to reference Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (1996). Action recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain, 119, 593–609.PubMed Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (1996). Action recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain, 119, 593–609.PubMed
go back to reference Gergely, G., & Watson, J. S. (1999). Early social-emotional development: Contingency perception and the social biofeedback model. In P. Rochat (Ed.), Early social cognition (pp. 101–136). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Gergely, G., & Watson, J. S. (1999). Early social-emotional development: Contingency perception and the social biofeedback model. In P. Rochat (Ed.), Early social cognition (pp. 101–136). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Grice, G. R. (1948). The relation of secondary reinforcement to delayed reward in visual discrimination learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 1–16. Grice, G. R. (1948). The relation of secondary reinforcement to delayed reward in visual discrimination learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 1–16.
go back to reference Gruber, H. E., Fink, C. D. & Damm, V. (1957). Effects of experience on perception of causality. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 89–93.PubMed Gruber, H. E., Fink, C. D. & Damm, V. (1957). Effects of experience on perception of causality. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 89–93.PubMed
go back to reference Haggard, P., Aschersleben, G., Gehrke, J., & Prinz, W. (2002). Action, binding, and awareness. In Prinz, W., & Hommel, B. (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention & Performance XIX (pp. 266–285). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Haggard, P., Aschersleben, G., Gehrke, J., & Prinz, W. (2002). Action, binding, and awareness. In Prinz, W., & Hommel, B. (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention & Performance XIX (pp. 266–285). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Hammond, L. J. (1980). The effect of contingency upon the appetitive conditioning of free operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 34, 297–304. Hammond, L. J. (1980). The effect of contingency upon the appetitive conditioning of free operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 34, 297–304.
go back to reference Hazeltine, E. (2002). The representational nature of sequence learning: Evidence for goal-based codes. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention & Performance XIX (pp. 673–689). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hazeltine, E. (2002). The representational nature of sequence learning: Evidence for goal-based codes. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention & Performance XIX (pp. 673–689). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Hebb, D. O. (1949). The organization of behavior. New York: Wiley. Hebb, D. O. (1949). The organization of behavior. New York: Wiley.
go back to reference Hoffmann, J., Sebald, A., & Stoecker, C. (2001). Irrelevant response effects improve serial learning in serial reaction time tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 470–482. Hoffmann, J., Sebald, A., & Stoecker, C. (2001). Irrelevant response effects improve serial learning in serial reaction time tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 470–482.
go back to reference Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information. Psychological Research, 55, 270–279. Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information. Psychological Research, 55, 270–279.
go back to reference Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261–268.PubMed Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261–268.PubMed
go back to reference Hommel, B. (1996). The cognitive representation of action: Automatic integration of perceived action effects. Psychological Research, 59, 176–186.PubMed Hommel, B. (1996). The cognitive representation of action: Automatic integration of perceived action effects. Psychological Research, 59, 176–186.PubMed
go back to reference Hommel, B. (1997). Toward an action-concept model of stimulus-response compatibility. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 281–320). Amsterdam: North-Holland. Hommel, B. (1997). Toward an action-concept model of stimulus-response compatibility. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 281–320). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
go back to reference Hommel, B. (1998). Perceiving one’s own action—and what it leads to. In J. S. Jordan (Ed.), Systems theories and a priori aspects of perception (pp. 143–179). Amsterdam: North-Holland. Hommel, B. (1998). Perceiving one’s own action—and what it leads to. In J. S. Jordan (Ed.), Systems theories and a priori aspects of perception (pp. 143–179). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
go back to reference Hommel, B. (2003a). Acquisition and control of voluntary action. In S. Maasen, W. Prinz & G. Roth (Eds.), Voluntary action: Brains, minds, and sociality (pp. 34–48). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hommel, B. (2003a). Acquisition and control of voluntary action. In S. Maasen, W. Prinz & G. Roth (Eds.), Voluntary action: Brains, minds, and sociality (pp. 34–48). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Hommel, B. (2003b). Coloring an action: Intending to produce color events eliminates the Stroop effect. Psychological Research (in press). Hommel, B. (2003b). Coloring an action: Intending to produce color events eliminates the Stroop effect. Psychological Research (in press).
go back to reference Hommel, B., Alonso, D., & Fuentes, L. (2001). Acquisition and generalization of action effects. Talk presented at the 12th Conference of the European Society for Cognitive Psychology. Edinburgh, Scotland, September 2001. Hommel, B., Alonso, D., & Fuentes, L. (2001). Acquisition and generalization of action effects. Talk presented at the 12th Conference of the European Society for Cognitive Psychology. Edinburgh, Scotland, September 2001.
go back to reference Hume, D. (1739/1964). Treatise of human nature. London: Oxford University Press. Hume, D. (1739/1964). Treatise of human nature. London: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Dover. James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Dover.
go back to reference Jenkins, H. M., & Ward, W. C. (1965). Judgment of contingency between responses and outcomes. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 79, 1–17. Jenkins, H. M., & Ward, W. C. (1965). Judgment of contingency between responses and outcomes. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 79, 1–17.
go back to reference Kaplan, P. S., & Hearst, E. (1982). Bridging temporal gaps between CS and US in autoshaping: Insertion of other stimuli before, during, and after CS. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 8, 187–203.CrossRefPubMed Kaplan, P. S., & Hearst, E. (1982). Bridging temporal gaps between CS and US in autoshaping: Insertion of other stimuli before, during, and after CS. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 8, 187–203.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Kunde, W., Hoffmann, J., & Zellmann, P. (2002). The impact of anticipated action effects on action planning. Acta Psychologica, 109, 137–155.CrossRefPubMed Kunde, W., Hoffmann, J., & Zellmann, P. (2002). The impact of anticipated action effects on action planning. Acta Psychologica, 109, 137–155.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Meck, W. H. (1985). Postreinforcement signal processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 52–70.CrossRefPubMed Meck, W. H. (1985). Postreinforcement signal processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 52–70.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Murata A., Gallese V., Luppino G., Kaseda M., & Sakata H. (2000). Selectivity for the shape, size, and orientation of objects for grasping in neurons of monkey parietal area AIP. Journal of Neurophysiology, 83, 2580–2601.PubMed Murata A., Gallese V., Luppino G., Kaseda M., & Sakata H. (2000). Selectivity for the shape, size, and orientation of objects for grasping in neurons of monkey parietal area AIP. Journal of Neurophysiology, 83, 2580–2601.PubMed
go back to reference Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford University Press. Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press. Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.
go back to reference Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9, 129–154. Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9, 129–154.
go back to reference Reed, P. (1992). Effect of a signaled delay between an action and outcome of human judgement of causality. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44B, 81–100. Reed, P. (1992). Effect of a signaled delay between an action and outcome of human judgement of causality. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44B, 81–100.
go back to reference Reed, P. (1999). Role of a stimulus filling an action-outcome delay in human judgments of causal effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 25, 92–102.CrossRefPubMed Reed, P. (1999). Role of a stimulus filling an action-outcome delay in human judgments of causal effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 25, 92–102.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Reed, P., & Reilly, S. (1990). Context extinction following conditioning with delayed reward enhances subsequent instrumental responding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 48–55.CrossRefPubMed Reed, P., & Reilly, S. (1990). Context extinction following conditioning with delayed reward enhances subsequent instrumental responding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 48–55.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Rescorla, R. A. (1967). Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychological Review, 74, 71–80.PubMed Rescorla, R. A. (1967). Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychological Review, 74, 71–80.PubMed
go back to reference Rescorla, R. A. (1982). Effect of a stimulus intervening between CS and US in autoshaping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 8, 131–141.CrossRefPubMed Rescorla, R. A. (1982). Effect of a stimulus intervening between CS and US in autoshaping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 8, 131–141.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Rescorla, R. A. (1992). Response-outcome vs. outcome-response associations in instrumental learning. Animal Learning and Behavior, 20, 223–232. Rescorla, R. A. (1992). Response-outcome vs. outcome-response associations in instrumental learning. Animal Learning and Behavior, 20, 223–232.
go back to reference Rochat, P. (1998). Self-perception and action in infancy. Experimental Brain Research, 123, 102–109.CrossRef Rochat, P. (1998). Self-perception and action in infancy. Experimental Brain Research, 123, 102–109.CrossRef
go back to reference Seggie, J. (1975). The empirical observation of the Piagetian concept of correlation. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 29, 32–42. Seggie, J. (1975). The empirical observation of the Piagetian concept of correlation. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 29, 32–42.
go back to reference Seligman, M. E. P., Maier, S. F., & Solomon, R. L. (1971). Unpredictable and uncontrollable aversive events. In F. R. Brush (Ed.), Aversive conditioning and learning (pp. 347–400). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Seligman, M. E. P., Maier, S. F., & Solomon, R. L. (1971). Unpredictable and uncontrollable aversive events. In F. R. Brush (Ed.), Aversive conditioning and learning (pp. 347–400). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
go back to reference Shaklee, H., & Mims, M. (1982). Sources of error in judging event covariations: Effects of memory demands. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 208–224. Shaklee, H., & Mims, M. (1982). Sources of error in judging event covariations: Effects of memory demands. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 208–224.
go back to reference Shaklee, H., & Wasserman, E. A. (1986). Judging interevent contingencies: Being right for the wrong causes. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 24, 91–94. Shaklee, H., & Wasserman, E. A. (1986). Judging interevent contingencies: Being right for the wrong causes. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 24, 91–94.
go back to reference Shaklee, H., Holt, P., Elek S., & Hall, L. (1988). Covariation judgment: Improving rule use among children, adolescents, and adults. Child Development, 59, 755–768. Shaklee, H., Holt, P., Elek S., & Hall, L. (1988). Covariation judgment: Improving rule use among children, adolescents, and adults. Child Development, 59, 755–768.
go back to reference Shanks, D. R. (1989). Selectional processes in causality judgment. Memory and Cognition, 17, 27–34. Shanks, D. R. (1989). Selectional processes in causality judgment. Memory and Cognition, 17, 27–34.
go back to reference Shanks, D. R. (1993). Human instrumental learning: A critical review of data and theory. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 319–354.PubMed Shanks, D. R. (1993). Human instrumental learning: A critical review of data and theory. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 319–354.PubMed
go back to reference Shanks, D. R., & Dickinson, A. (1987). Associative accounts of causality judgment. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 21, 229–261. Shanks, D. R., & Dickinson, A. (1987). Associative accounts of causality judgment. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 21, 229–261.
go back to reference Shanks, D. R., & Dickinson, A. (1991). Instrumental judgment and performance under variations in action-outcome contingency and contiguity. Memory and Cognition, 19, 353–360. Shanks, D. R., & Dickinson, A. (1991). Instrumental judgment and performance under variations in action-outcome contingency and contiguity. Memory and Cognition, 19, 353–360.
go back to reference Shanks, D. R., Pearson, S. M., & Dickinson, A. (1989). Temporal contiguity and the judgment of causality by human subjects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41B, 139–159. Shanks, D. R., Pearson, S. M., & Dickinson, A. (1989). Temporal contiguity and the judgment of causality by human subjects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41B, 139–159.
go back to reference Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300–304.PubMed Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300–304.PubMed
go back to reference Stock, A., & Hoffmann, J. (2002). Intentional fixation of behavioural learning, or how R-O learning blocks S-R learning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14, 127–153.CrossRef Stock, A., & Hoffmann, J. (2002). Intentional fixation of behavioural learning, or how R-O learning blocks S-R learning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14, 127–153.CrossRef
go back to reference Stoet, G., & Hommel, B. (1999). Action planning and the temporal binding of response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1625–1640. Stoet, G., & Hommel, B. (1999). Action planning and the temporal binding of response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1625–1640.
go back to reference Thorndike, E. L. (1927). The law of effect. American Journal of Psychology, 39, 212–222. Thorndike, E. L. (1927). The law of effect. American Journal of Psychology, 39, 212–222.
go back to reference Tolman, E. C., Hall, C. S., & Bretnall, E. P. (1932). A disproof of the law of effect and a substitution of the laws of emphasis, motivation and disruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15, 601–614. Tolman, E. C., Hall, C. S., & Bretnall, E. P. (1932). A disproof of the law of effect and a substitution of the laws of emphasis, motivation and disruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15, 601–614.
go back to reference Trapold, M. A. (1970). Are expectancies based upon different reinforcing events discriminably different? Learning and Motivation, 1, 129–140. Trapold, M. A. (1970). Are expectancies based upon different reinforcing events discriminably different? Learning and Motivation, 1, 129–140.
go back to reference Urcuioli, P. J., & DeMarse, T. (1996). Associative processes in differential outcome discriminations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 22, 192–204.CrossRef Urcuioli, P. J., & DeMarse, T. (1996). Associative processes in differential outcome discriminations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 22, 192–204.CrossRef
go back to reference Waldmann, M. R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1992). Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 222–236. Waldmann, M. R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1992). Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 222–236.
go back to reference Walker, E. L. (1969). Reinforcement—”The one ring.” In J. T. Tapp (Ed.), Reinforcement and behavior (pp. 47–62). New York: Academic Press. Walker, E. L. (1969). Reinforcement—”The one ring.” In J. T. Tapp (Ed.), Reinforcement and behavior (pp. 47–62). New York: Academic Press.
go back to reference Wasserman, E. A. (1990). Detecting response-outcome relations: Toward an understanding of the causal texture of the environment. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 26, 27–82. Wasserman, E. A. (1990). Detecting response-outcome relations: Toward an understanding of the causal texture of the environment. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 26, 27–82.
go back to reference Wasserman, E. A., & Miller, R. R. (1997). What’s elementary about associative learning? Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 573–607.CrossRefPubMed Wasserman, E. A., & Miller, R. R. (1997). What’s elementary about associative learning? Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 573–607.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wasserman, E. A., & Shaklee, H. (1984). Judging response-outcome relations: The role of response-outcome contingency, outcome probability, and method of information presentation. Memory and Cognition, 12, 270–286. Wasserman, E. A., & Shaklee, H. (1984). Judging response-outcome relations: The role of response-outcome contingency, outcome probability, and method of information presentation. Memory and Cognition, 12, 270–286.
go back to reference Young, M. E. (1995). On the origin of personal causal theories. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 83–104. Young, M. E. (1995). On the origin of personal causal theories. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 83–104.
go back to reference Ziessler, M. (1998). Response-effect learning as a major component of implicit serial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 962–978. Ziessler, M. (1998). Response-effect learning as a major component of implicit serial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 962–978.
go back to reference Ziessler, M., & Nattkemper, D. (2001). Learning of event sequences is based on response-effect learning: Further evidence from a serial reaction task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 595–613. Ziessler, M., & Nattkemper, D. (2001). Learning of event sequences is based on response-effect learning: Further evidence from a serial reaction task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 595–613.
go back to reference Ziessler, M., & Nattkemper, D. (2002). Effect anticipation in action planning. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention & Performance XIX (pp. 645–672). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ziessler, M., & Nattkemper, D. (2002). Effect anticipation in action planning. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention & Performance XIX (pp. 645–672). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Metagegevens
Titel
Contiguity and contingency in action-effect learning
Auteurs
Birgit Elsner
Bernhard Hommel
Publicatiedatum
01-04-2004
Uitgeverij
Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 2-3/2004
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-003-0151-8

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2-3/2004

Psychological Research 2-3/2004 Naar de uitgave