Academic Bibliography

 Search 200 years of publications by Ghent University researchers.
Advanced search
2 files | 1.76 MB
Add to list
  1. Search results
  2. Dissociations between learning phenom...

Dissociations between learning phenomena do not necessitate multiple learning processes : mere instructions about upcoming stimulus presentations differentially influence liking and expectancy

Jan De Houwer (UGent) , Simone Mattavelli (UGent) and Pieter Van Dessel (UGent)
(2019) JOURNAL OF COGNITION. 2(1). p.1-11
Author
Organization
Abstract
Prior research showed that the degree of statistical contingency between the presence of stimuli moderates changes in expectancies about the presence of those stimuli (i.e., expectancy learning) but not changes in the liking of those stimuli (i.e., evaluative conditioning). This dissociation is typically interpreted as evidence for dual process models of associative learning. We tested an alternative account according to which both types of learning rely on a single process propositional learning mechanism but reflect different kinds of propositional beliefs. In line with the idea that changes in liking reflect beliefs about stimulus co-occurrences whereas changes in expectancy reflect beliefs about stimulus contingency, we found that evaluative ratings depended only on instructions about whether a stimulus would co-occur with a positive or negative stimulus whereas expectancy ratings were influenced also by instructions about individual stimulus presentations.

Downloads

  • Download
    JDH SM dsfs.txt
    • data factsheet
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • Text
    • |
    • 3.57 KB
  • Download
    10.5334 joc.59.pdf
    • full text (Published version)
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.76 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
De Houwer, Jan, et al. “Dissociations between Learning Phenomena Do Not Necessitate Multiple Learning Processes : Mere Instructions about Upcoming Stimulus Presentations Differentially Influence Liking and Expectancy.” JOURNAL OF COGNITION, vol. 2, no. 1, 2019, pp. 1–11, doi:10.5334/joc.59.
APA
De Houwer, J., Mattavelli, S., & Van Dessel, P. (2019). Dissociations between learning phenomena do not necessitate multiple learning processes : mere instructions about upcoming stimulus presentations differentially influence liking and expectancy. JOURNAL OF COGNITION, 2(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.59
Chicago author-date
De Houwer, Jan, Simone Mattavelli, and Pieter Van Dessel. 2019. “Dissociations between Learning Phenomena Do Not Necessitate Multiple Learning Processes : Mere Instructions about Upcoming Stimulus Presentations Differentially Influence Liking and Expectancy.” JOURNAL OF COGNITION 2 (1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.59.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
De Houwer, Jan, Simone Mattavelli, and Pieter Van Dessel. 2019. “Dissociations between Learning Phenomena Do Not Necessitate Multiple Learning Processes : Mere Instructions about Upcoming Stimulus Presentations Differentially Influence Liking and Expectancy.” JOURNAL OF COGNITION 2 (1): 1–11. doi:10.5334/joc.59.
Vancouver
1.
De Houwer J, Mattavelli S, Van Dessel P. Dissociations between learning phenomena do not necessitate multiple learning processes : mere instructions about upcoming stimulus presentations differentially influence liking and expectancy. JOURNAL OF COGNITION. 2019;2(1):1–11.
IEEE
[1]
J. De Houwer, S. Mattavelli, and P. Van Dessel, “Dissociations between learning phenomena do not necessitate multiple learning processes : mere instructions about upcoming stimulus presentations differentially influence liking and expectancy,” JOURNAL OF COGNITION, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2019.
@article{8662039,
  abstract     = {{Prior research showed that the degree of statistical contingency between the presence of stimuli moderates changes in expectancies about the presence of those stimuli (i.e., expectancy learning) but not changes in the liking of those stimuli (i.e., evaluative conditioning). This dissociation is typically interpreted as evidence for dual process models of associative learning. We tested an alternative account according to which both types of learning rely on a single process propositional learning mechanism but reflect different kinds of propositional beliefs. In line with the idea that changes in liking reflect beliefs about stimulus co-occurrences whereas changes in expectancy reflect beliefs about stimulus contingency, we found that evaluative ratings depended only on instructions about whether a stimulus would co-occur with a positive or negative stimulus whereas expectancy ratings were influenced also by instructions about individual stimulus presentations.}},
  articleno    = {{7}},
  author       = {{De Houwer, Jan and Mattavelli, Simone and Van Dessel, Pieter}},
  issn         = {{2514-4820}},
  journal      = {{JOURNAL OF COGNITION}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{7:1--7:11}},
  title        = {{Dissociations between learning phenomena do not necessitate multiple learning processes : mere instructions about upcoming stimulus presentations differentially influence liking and expectancy}},
  url          = {{http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.59}},
  volume       = {{2}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}
Altmetric
View in Altmetric