Learned predictiveness effects in humans: a function of learning, performance, or both?

Many previous studies of animal and human learning indicate a processing advantage for cues previously experienced as good predictors of outcomes over those experienced as poorer predictors. Four studies of human associative learning investigated whether learned predictiveness acts at the level of learning (modulating the rate at which cue-outcome associations form), performance (modulating the strength of behavioral responses), or both. In Experiments 1-3, it was found that retrospectively altering the learned predictiveness of cues influenced responding to those cues, demonstrating that learned predictiveness influences performance. Experiment 4 indicates that learned predictiveness also influences learning by demonstrating that the learned predictiveness of a cue affects the acquisition of an association between a novel cue and the outcome with which it is paired.

Blocking of human causal learning involves learned changes in stimulus processing.

Several theories of associative learning propose that blocking reflects changes in the processing devoted to learning about cues. The results of the only direct test of this suggestion in human learning (Kruschke & Blair, 2000) could equally well be explained in terms of, among others, interference in learning or memory. The present study tested this suggestion in a situation in which processing-change and interference accounts predict opposing results. Results support the idea that blocking in human learning can reflect a change in processing of the cues involved.