Performance Factors in Associative Learning: Assessment of the Sometimes Competing Retrieval Model
Average rating
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Keyword
Sometimes Competing RetrievalMathematical Models Of Learning
Pavlovian Conditioning
Associative Learning
Date Published
2012-01-01
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Previous simulations revealed that the sometimes competing retrieval model (SOCR; Stout & Miller, 2007), which assumes local error reduction, can explain many cue interaction phenomena that elude traditional associative theories based on total error reduction. Here we applied SOCR to a new set of Pavlovian phenomena. Simulations used a single set of fixed parameters to simulate each basic effect (e.g., blocking) and, for specific experiments using different procedures, used fitted parameters discovered through hillclimbing. In Simulation 1, SOCR was successfully applied to basic acquisition, including the ‘overtraining effect,’ which is context dependent. In Simulation 2, we applied SOCR to basic extinction and renewal. SOCR anticipated these effects with both fixed parameters and best fitting parameters, although the renewal effects were weaker than those observed in some experiments. In Simulation 3a, feature negative training was simulated, including the often observed transition from second-order conditioning to conditioned inhibition. In Simulation 3b, SOCR predicted the observation that conditioned inhibition after feature-negative and differential conditioning depends on intertrial interval. In Simulation 3c, SOCR successfully predicted failure of conditioned inhibition to extinguish with presentations of the inhibitor alone under most circumstances. In Simulation 4, cue competition, including blocking (4a), recovery from relative validity (4b), and unblocking (4c), were simulated. In Simulation 5, SOCR correctly predicted that inhibitors gain more behavioral control than excitors when they are trained in compound. Simulation 6 demonstrated that SOCR explains the slower acquisition observed following CS-weak shock pairings.Collections