Stephan Koenig

The informational value of contexts affects context-dependent learning

In two predictive-learning experiments, we investigated the role of the informational value of contexts for the formation of context-dependent behavior. During Phase 1 of each experiment, participants received either a conditional discrimination in which contexts were relevant (Group Relevant) or a simple discrimination in which contexts were irrelevant (Group Irrelevant). Each experiment also included an ABA renewal procedure. Participants received Z+ in context A during Phase 1, extinction of Z in context B during Phase 2, and were tested with Z in context A during a test phase. In each experiment, extinction of Z proceeded faster and was followed by stronger response recovery in Group Relevant than in Group Irrelevant. In Experiment 2, which included recording of eye-gaze behavior, dwell times on contexts were longer in Group Relevant than in Group Irrelevant. Our results support the idea that relevant contexts receive more attention, leading to stronger context specificity of learning.

Curved saccade trajectories reveal conflicting predictions in associative learning.

We report how the trajectories of saccadic eye movements are affected by memory interference acquired during associative learning. Human participants learned to perform saccadic choice responses based on the presentation of arbitrary central cues A, B, AC, BC, AX, BY, X, and Y that were trained to predict the appearance of a peripheral target stimulus at 1 of 3 possible locations, right (R), mid (M), or left (L), in the upper hemifield. We analyzed as measures of associative learning the frequency, latency, and curvature of saccades elicited by the cues and directed at the trained locations in anticipation of the targets. Participants were trained on two concurrent discrimination problems A+R, AC+R, AX+M, X+M and B+L, BC+L, BY+M, Y+M. From a connectionist perspective, cues were predicted to acquire associative links connecting the cues to the trained outcomes in memory. Model simulations based on the learning rule of the Rescorla and Wagner (1972) model revealed that for some cues, the prediction of the correct target location was challenged by the interfering prediction of an incorrect location. We observed that saccades directed at the correct location in anticipation of the target curved away from the location that was predicted by the interfering association. Furthermore, changes in curvature during training corresponded to predicted changes in associative memory. We propose that this curvature was caused by the inhibition of the incorrect prediction, as previously has been suggested with the concept of distractor inhibition (Sheliga, Riggio, & Rizzolatti, 1994; Tipper, Howard, & Houghton, 2000). The paradigm provides a new method to examine memory interference during associative learning.

An exploration of the feature-positive effect in adult humans

Experiment 1 compared the acquisition of a feature-positive and a feature-negative discrimination in humans. In the former, an outcome was signaled by two stimuli together, but not by one of these stimuli alone. In the latter, the outcome was signaled by one stimulus alone, but not by two stimuli together. Using a within-group design, the experiment revealed that the feature-positive discrimination was acquired more readily than the feature-negative discrimination. Experiment 2 tested an explanation for these results, based on the Rescorla–Wagner theory, by examining how novel discriminations, based on a combination of a feature-positive and a feature-negative discrimination, were solved. The results did not accord with predictions from the theory. Alternative explanations for the results are considered.

Attentional Bias for Uncertain Cues of Shock in Human Fear Conditioning: Evidence for Attentional Learning Theory

We conducted a human fear conditioning experiment in which three different color cues were followed by an aversive electric shock on 0, 50, and 100% of the trials, and thus induced low (L), partial (P), and high (H) shock expectancy, respectively. The cues differed with respect to the strength of their shock association (L < P < H) and the uncertainty of their prediction (L < P > H). During conditioning we measured pupil dilation and ocular fixations to index differences in the attentional processing of the cues. After conditioning, the shock-associated colors were introduced as irrelevant distracters during visual search for a shape target while shocks were no longer administered and we analyzed the cues’ potential to capture and hold overt attention automatically. Our findings suggest that fear conditioning creates an automatic attention bias for the conditioned cues that depends on their correlation with the aversive outcome. This bias was exclusively linked to the strength of the cues’ shock association for the early attentional processing of cues in the visual periphery, but additionally was influenced by the uncertainty of the shock prediction after participants fixated on the cues. These findings are in accord with attentional learning theories that formalize how associative learning shapes automatic attention.

Pupil dilation indicates the coding of past prediction errors: Evidence for attentional learning theory

The attentional learning theory of Pearce and Hall () predicts more attention to uncertain cues that have caused a high prediction error in the past. We examined how the cue-elicited pupil dilation during associative learning was linked to such error-driven attentional processes. In three experiments, participants were trained to acquire associations between different cues and their appetitive (Experiment 1), motor (Experiment 2), or aversive (Experiment 3) outcomes. All experiments were designed to examine differences in the processing of continuously reinforced cues (consistently followed by the outcome) versus partially reinforced, uncertain cues (randomly followed by the outcome). We measured the pupil dilation elicited by the cues in anticipation of the outcome and analyzed how this conditioned pupil response changed over the course of learning. In all experiments, changes in pupil size complied with the same basic pattern: During early learning, consistently reinforced cues elicited greater pupil dilation than uncertain, randomly reinforced cues, but this effect gradually reversed to yield a greater pupil dilation for uncertain cues toward the end of learning. The pattern of data accords with the changes in prediction error and error-driven attention formalized by the Pearce-Hall theory.

Reward Draws the Eye, Uncertainty Holds the Eye: Associative Learning Modulates Distractor Interference in Visual Search

Stimuli in our sensory environment differ with respect to their physical salience but moreover may acquire motivational salience by association with reward. If we repeatedly observed that reward is available in the context of a particular cue but absent in the context of another cue the former typically attracts more attention than the latter. However, we also may encounter cues uncorrelated with reward. A cue with 50% reward contingency may induce an average reward expectancy but at the same time induces high reward uncertainty. In the current experiment we examined how both values, reward expectancy and uncertainty, affected overt attention. Two different colors were established as predictive cues for low reward and high reward respectively. A third color was followed by high reward on 50% of the trials and thus induced uncertainty. Colors then were introduced as distractors during search for a shape target, and we examined the relative potential of the color distractors to capture and hold the first fixation. We observed that capture frequency corresponded to reward expectancy while capture duration corresponded to uncertainty. The results may suggest that within trial reward expectancy is represented at an earlier time window than uncertainty.

Indicators of early and late processing reveal the importance of within-trial-time for theories of associative learning.

In four human learning experiments (Pavlovian skin conductance, causal learning, speeded classification task), we evaluated several associative learning theories that assume either an elemental (modified unique cue model and Harris’ model) or a configural (Pearce’s configural theory and an extension of it) form of stimulus processing. The experiments used two modified patterning problems (A/B/C+, AB/BC/AC+ vs. ABC-; A+, BC+ vs. ABC-). Pearce’s configural theory successfully predicted all of our data reflecting early stimulus processing, while the predictions of the elemental theories were in accord with all of our data reflecting later stages of stimulus processing. Our results suggest that the form of stimulus representation depends on the amount of time available for stimulus processing. Our findings highlight the necessity to investigate stimulus processing during conditioning on a finer time scale than usually done in contemporary research.

Contextual control of attentional allocation in human discrimination learning.

In 3 human predictive learning experiments, we investigated whether the allocation of attention can come under the control of contextual stimuli. In each experiment, participants initially received a conditional discrimination for which one set of cues was trained as relevant in Context 1 and irrelevant in Context 2, and another set was relevant in Context 2 and irrelevant in Context 1. For Experiments 1 and 2, we observed that a second discrimination based on cues that had previously been trained as relevant in Context 1 during the conditional discrimination was acquired more rapidly in Context 1 than in Context 2. Experiment 3 revealed a similar outcome when new stimuli from the original dimensions were used in the test stage. Our results support the view that the associability of a stimulus can be controlled by the stimuli that accompany it.

A test for a difference in the associability of blocked and uninformative cues in human predictive learning

In human predictive learning, blocking, A+ AB+, and a simple discrimination, UX+ VX–, result in a stronger response to the blocked, B, than the uninformative cue, X (where letters represent cues and + and – represent different outcomes). To assess whether these different treatments result in more attention being paid to blocked than uninformative cues, Stage 1 in each of three experiments generated two blocked cues, B and E, and two uninformative cues, X and Y. In Stage 2, participants received two simple discriminations: either BX+ EX– and BY+ EY–, or BX+ BY– and EX+ EY–. If more attention is paid to blocked than uninformative cues, then the first pair of discriminations will be solved more readily than the second pair. In contrast to this prediction, both discriminations were acquired at the same rate. These results are explained by the theory of Mackintosh, by virtue of the assumption that learning is governed by an individual rather than a common error term.

Context modulation of learned attention deployment

In three experiments, we investigated the contextual control of attention in human discrimination learning. In each experiment, participants initially received discrimination training in which the cues from Dimension A were relevant in Context 1 but irrelevant in Context 2, whereas the cues from Dimension B were irrelevant in Context 1 but relevant in Context 2. In Experiment 1, the same cues from each dimension were used in Contexts 1 and 2, whereas in Experiments 2 and 3, the cues from each dimension were changed across contexts. In each experiment, participants were subsequently shifted to a transfer discrimination involving novel cues from either dimension, to assess the contextual control of attention. In Experiment 1, measures of eye gaze during the transfer discrimination revealed that Dimension A received more attention than Dimension B in Context 1, whereas the reverse occurred in Context 2. Corresponding results indicating the contextual control of attention were found in Experiments 2 and 3, in which we used the speed of learning (associability) as an indirect marker of learned attentional changes. Implications of our results for current theories of learning and attention are discussed.