Stimulus competition in pre/post and online ratings in an evaluative learning design

Evaluative learning is said to differ from Pavlovian associative learning in that it reflects stimulus contiguity, not contingency. Thus, evaluative learning should not be subject to stimulus competition, a proposal tested in the current experiments. Participants were presented in elemental and comp...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Purkis, H., Lipp, Ottmar
Format: Journal Article
Published: 2010
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/27617
_version_ 1848752313304350720
author Purkis, H.
Lipp, Ottmar
author_facet Purkis, H.
Lipp, Ottmar
author_sort Purkis, H.
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Evaluative learning is said to differ from Pavlovian associative learning in that it reflects stimulus contiguity, not contingency. Thus, evaluative learning should not be subject to stimulus competition, a proposal tested in the current experiments. Participants were presented in elemental and compound training phases with pictures of shapes as CSs. Each shape/pair of shapes was followed by a picture of a happy or an angry face as the US. In Experiments 1 and 2, evaluative ratings were collected before and after the experiment, and, in Experiment 3, participants provided evaluations online. Stimulus competition was evident in all experiments confirming that evaluative learning is sensitive to stimulus contingencies. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T08:06:38Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-27617
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T08:06:38Z
publishDate 2010
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-276172017-09-13T15:10:07Z Stimulus competition in pre/post and online ratings in an evaluative learning design Purkis, H. Lipp, Ottmar Evaluative learning is said to differ from Pavlovian associative learning in that it reflects stimulus contiguity, not contingency. Thus, evaluative learning should not be subject to stimulus competition, a proposal tested in the current experiments. Participants were presented in elemental and compound training phases with pictures of shapes as CSs. Each shape/pair of shapes was followed by a picture of a happy or an angry face as the US. In Experiments 1 and 2, evaluative ratings were collected before and after the experiment, and, in Experiment 3, participants provided evaluations online. Stimulus competition was evident in all experiments confirming that evaluative learning is sensitive to stimulus contingencies. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 2010 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/27617 10.1016/j.lmot.2009.12.001 restricted
spellingShingle Purkis, H.
Lipp, Ottmar
Stimulus competition in pre/post and online ratings in an evaluative learning design
title Stimulus competition in pre/post and online ratings in an evaluative learning design
title_full Stimulus competition in pre/post and online ratings in an evaluative learning design
title_fullStr Stimulus competition in pre/post and online ratings in an evaluative learning design
title_full_unstemmed Stimulus competition in pre/post and online ratings in an evaluative learning design
title_short Stimulus competition in pre/post and online ratings in an evaluative learning design
title_sort stimulus competition in pre/post and online ratings in an evaluative learning design
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/27617