Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-jkvpf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-29T06:45:11.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Link-based learning theory creates more problems than it solves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2009

Chris J. Mitchell ,
Jan De Houwer  and
Peter F. Lovibond
Chris J. Mitchell
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Kensington 2052, Australiachris.mitchell@unsw.edu.auhttp://www.psy.unsw.edu.au/profiles/cmitchell.htmlp.lovibond@unsw.edu.auhttp://www.psy.unsw.edu.au/profiles/plovibond.html
Jan De Houwer
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Ghent University, Henn Dunantlaan 2, B-900, Ghent, Belgium. Jan.dehouwer@ugent.behttp://users.ugent.be/~jdhouwer/
Peter F. Lovibond
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Kensington 2052, Australiachris.mitchell@unsw.edu.auhttp://www.psy.unsw.edu.au/profiles/cmitchell.htmlp.lovibond@unsw.edu.auhttp://www.psy.unsw.edu.au/profiles/plovibond.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this response, we provide further clarification of the propositional approach to human associative learning. We explain why the empirical evidence favors the propositional approach over a dual-system approach and how the propositional approach is compatible with evolution and neuroscience. Finally, we point out aspects of the propositional approach that need further development and challenge proponents of dual-system models to specify the systems more clearly so that these models can be tested.

Information

Type
Authors' Response
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , April 2009 , pp. 230 - 246
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barsalou, L. W. (2008) Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 59:617–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bechara, A., Tranel, D, Damasio, H., Adolphs, R., Rockland, C. & Damasio, A. R. (1995) Double dissociation of conditioning and declarative knowledge relative to the amygdala and hippocampus in humans. Science 269:1115–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckers, T., De Houwer, J., Pineno, O., & Miller, R. R. (2005) Outcome additivity and outcome maximality influence cue competition in human causal learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 31:238–49.Google ScholarPubMed
Carson, S. H., Peterson, J. B. & Higgins, D. M. (2003) Decreased latent inhibition is associated with increased creative achievement in high-functioning individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85:499–506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chambaron, S., Ginhac, D., Ferrel-Chapus, C. & Perruchet, P. (2006) Implicit learning of a repeated segment in continuous tracking: A reappraisal. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 59:845–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christiansen, M. H. & Chater, N. (2008) Language as shaped by the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31(5):489–558.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, A. (1990) Connectionism, competence, and explanation. British Journal of Philosophical Science 41:195–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, R. E. & Squire, L. R. (1998) Classical conditioning and brain systems: The role of awareness. Science 280(5360):77–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornwell, B. R., Echiverri, A. M. & Grillon, C. (2007) Sensitivity to masked conditioned stimuli predicts conditioned response magnitude under masked conditions. Psychophysiology 44:403–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davey, G. C. L. (1992) Classical conditioning and the acquisition of human fears and phobias: A review and synthesis of the literature. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy 14:29–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, M. E. & Biferno, M. A. (1973) Concurrent measurement of awareness and electrodermal classical conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology 101:55–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dawson, M. E., Rissling, A. J., Schell, A. M. & Wilcox, R. (2007) Under what conditions can human affective conditioning occur without contingency awareness? Test of the evaluative conditioning paradigm. Emotion 7:755–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dawson, M. E., Schell, A. M. & Banis, H. T. (1986) Greater resistance to extinction of electrodermal responses conditioned to potentially phobic CS: A non-cognitive process? Psychophysiology 23:552–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Houwer, J., (2009) The propositional approach to associative learning as an alternative for association formation models. Learning and Behavior 37:1–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gawronski, B. & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006) Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin 132:692–731.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamm, A. O. & Vaitl, D. (1996) Affective learning: Awareness and aversion. Psychophysiology 33:698–710.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karazinov, D. M. & Boakes, R. A. (2007) Second order conditioning in human predictive judgments when there is little time to think. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 60:448–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knuttinen, M. G., Power, J. M., Preston, A. R. & Disterhoft, J. F. (2001) Awareness in classical differential eyeblink conditioning in young and aging humans. Behavioral Neuroscience 115(4):747–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Pelley, M. E., Oakeshott, S. M. & McLaren, I. P. L. (2005a) Blocking and unblocking in human causal learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 31:56–70.Google ScholarPubMed
Lipp, O. V. & Purkis, H. (2005) No support for dual process accounts of human affective learning in Pavlovian conditioning. Cognition and Emotion 19:269–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lovibond, P. F., Loo, J. C. J., Weidemann, G. & Mitchell, C. J. (submitted) Awareness is necessary for differential trace and delay eyeblink conditioning in humans.Google Scholar
Lovibond, P. F. & Shanks, D. R. (2002) The role of awareness in Pavlovian conditioning: Empirical evidence and theoretical implications. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 28:3–26.Google ScholarPubMed
Lovibond, P. F., Siddle, D. A. T. & Bond, N. W. (1993) Resistance to extinction of fear-relevant stimuli: Preparedness or selective sensitization? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 122:449–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975) A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review 82(4):276–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merker, B. (2007) Consciousness without a cerebral cortex: A challenge for neuroscience and medicine. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30(1):63–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, R. R. & Matzel, L. D. (1988) The comparator hypothesis: A response rule for the expression of associations. In: The psychology of learning and motivation, vol. 22, ed. Bower, G. H., pp. 51–92. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, C. J. & Lovibond, P. F. (2002) Backward and forward blocking in human electrodermal conditioning: Blocking requires an assumption of outcome additivity. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 55B:311–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, C. J., Wardle, S., Lovibond, P. F., Weidemann, G. & Chang, B. (in revision) Is Perruchet's dissociation between cued reaction time and outcome expectancy evidence for two separate associative learning processes? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.Google Scholar
Newell, B. R., Lagnado, D. A. & Shanks, D. R. (2007) Challenging the role of implicit processes in probabilistic category learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 14:505–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Öhman, A. & Soares, J. J. F. (1998) Emotional conditioning to masked stimuli: Expectancies for aversive outcomes following non-recognized fear-relevant stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 127:69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearce, J. M. & Hall, G. (1980) A model for Pavlovian learning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychological Review 87:532–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perruchet, P. (1985) A pitfall for the expectancy theory of human eyelid conditioning. Pavlovian Journal of Biological Sciences 20:163–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perruchet, P., Cleeremans, A. & Destrebecqz, A. (2006) Dissociating the effects of automatic activation and explicit expectancy on reaction times in a simple associative learning task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 32:955–65.Google Scholar
Pessoa, L., Japee, S. & Ungerleider, L. G. (2005) Visual awareness and the detection of fearful faces. Emotion 5:243–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pleyers, G., Corneille, O., Luminet, O. & Yzerbyt, V. (2007) Aware and (dis)liking: Item-based analyses reveal that valence acquisition via evaluative conditioning emerges only when there is contingency awareness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33:130–44.Google ScholarPubMed
Purkis, H. M. & Lipp, O. V. (2001) Does affective learning exist in the absence of contingency awareness? Learning and Motivation 32:84–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rescorla, R. A. & Wagner, A. R. (1972) A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In: Classical conditioning: Current theory and research, vol. 2, ed. Black, A. H. & Prokasy, W. F., pp. 64–99. Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Shanks, D. R. (2007) Associationism and cognition: Human contingency learning at 25. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 60:291–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shanks, D. R. & Lovibond, P. F. (2002) Autonomic and eyeblink conditioning are closely related to contingency awareness: Reply to Wiens and Öhman (2002) and Manns et al. (2002). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 28:38–42.Google ScholarPubMed
Shanks, D. R. & St. John, M. F.. (1994) Characteristics of dissociable human learning systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17:367–447; discussion pp. 447–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smyth, A. C. & Shanks, D. R. (2008) Awareness in contextual cuing with extended and concurrent explicit tests. Memory and Cognition 36:403–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Speekenbrink, M., Channon, S. & Shanks, D. R. (2008) Learning strategies in amnesia. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 32:292–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spiegel, R. & McLaren, I. P. L. (2006) Associative sequence learning in humans. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 32(2):156–63.Google ScholarPubMed
Stevenson, R. J., Boakes, R. A. & Prescott, J. (1998) Changes in odor sweetness resulting from implicit learning of a simultaneous odor-sweetness association: An example of learned synesthesia. Learning and Motivation 29:113–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, A. R. (1981) SOP: A model of automatic memory processing in animal behavior. In: Information processing in animals: Memory mechanisms, ed. Spear, N. E. & Miller, R. R., pp. 5–47. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Wardle, S. G., Mitchell, C. J. & Lovibond, P. F. (2007) Flavor evaluative conditioning and contingency awareness. Learning and Behavior 35:233–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weike, A. I., Schupp, H. T. & Hamm, A. O. (2007) Fear acquisition requires awareness in trace but not delay conditioning. Psychophysiology 44(1):170–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiens, S., Katkin, E. S. & Öhman, A. (2003) Effects of trial order and differential conditioning on acquisition of differential shock expectancy and skin conductance conditioning to masked stimuli. Psychophysiology 40:989–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, L. & Shanks, D. R. (2004) Intentional control and implicit sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 30:354–69.Google ScholarPubMed