THE ROLE OF CS-US CONTINGENCY IN HUMAN EVALUATIVE CONDITIONING
THE ROLE OF CS-US CONTINGENCY IN HUMAN EVALUATIVE CONDITIONING
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/0005-7967(93)90003-d
复制
发表时间：
1993-11-01
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
EELEN, P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
BAEYENS, F;HERMANS, D;EELEN, P
最近的研究表明，在巴甫洛夫条件反射中，两个不同的过程可能是有效的：信号学习和评价学习，导致两种性质不同的联想结构。信号学习被假设为负责为我们提供重要事件（US）的真正预测因子（CS）。这一命题逻辑上意味着认知相关关系，即CS和US之间的偶然性应该是信号学习的关键决定因素。另一方面，评价性条件反射指的是这样一种观察，即仅仅将中性刺激与（不）喜欢的刺激配对，就会使原本中性的刺激的效价向（负）积极的方向改变。正如其他地方所争论的那样，评价性条件作用可能是基于CS获得对美国的仅仅参考价值，而不涉及任何真正的CS-US期望。由此，假设评价性条件反射可能不依赖于CS-US偶然性。使用标准的评价性条件反射范式，四个不同水平的CS-US应急被试之间的基础上创建的。评价性条件反射的整体效果非常显著，并且不受CS-US关系的意识的影响。至关重要的是，这种条件作用没有互动的水平的应急，支持的假设，CS-US应急是不是一个重要的决定因素的评价条件。此外，这种效果是在学生同时被证明有意识地相当准确地记录了CS-US应急的不同水平的情况下获得的。
Recent studies suggest that in Pavlovian conditioning, two different processes may be operative: signal learning and evaluative learning, resulting in two qualitatively different associative structures. Signal-learning is hypothesized to be responsible for providing us with genuine predictors (CS) for significant events (US). This proposition logically entails that the statistical-correlational relation, i.e. the contingency between CS and US should be a crucial determinant of signal learning. Evaluative conditioning, on the other hand, refers to the observation that the mere pairing of neutral with (dis)liked stimuli changes the valence of the originally neutral stimuli in a (negative) positive direction. As argued elsewhere, evaluative conditioning is probably based on the CS acquiring a mere referential value to the US, without any genuine CS-US expectancy being involved. From this, it was hypothesized that evaluative conditioning might not be dependent on CS-US contingency. Using the standard evaluative conditioning paradigm, four different levels of CS-US contingency were created on a between-subject base. The overall effect of evaluative conditioning was strongly significant, and was not mediated by awareness of the CS-US relation. Of crucial importance, this conditioning effect did not interact with the level of contingency, supporting the hypothesis that CS-US contingency is not a crucial determinant of evaluative conditioning. Moreover, this effect was obtained in a situation in which Ss simultaneously evidenced to have consciously registered quite accurately the different levels of CS-US contingency.