Is there hierarchical generalization in response-effect learning?

被引:6
作者
Eichfelder, Lea [1 ]
Franz, Volker H. [2 ]
Janczyk, Markus [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bremen, Dept Psychol, Bremen, Germany
[2] Univ Tubingen, Dept Comp Sci, Tubingen, Germany
关键词
Ideomotor theory; Response-effect learning; Response-effect compatibility; Generalization; Superordinate category; FREE-CHOICE TASKS; EFFECT COMPATIBILITY;
D O I
10.1007/s00221-022-06473-w
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Ideomotor theory is an influential approach to understand goal-directed behavior. In this framework, response-effect (R-E) learning is assumed as a prerequisite for voluntary action: Once associations between motor actions and their effects in the environment have been formed, the anticipation of these effects will automatically activate the associated motor pattern. R-E learning is typically investigated with (induction) experiments that comprise an acquisition phase, where R-E associations are presumably learned, and a subsequent test phase, where the previous effects serve as stimuli for a response. While most studies used stimuli in the test phase that were identical to the effects in the acquisition phase, one study reported generalization from exemplars to their superordinate category (Hommel et al., Vis Cogn 10:965-986, 2003, Exp. 1). However, studies on so-called R-E compatibility did not report such generalization. We aimed to conceptually replicate Experiment 1 of Hommel et al. (Vis Cogn 10:965-986, 2003) with a free-choice test phase. While we did observe effects consistent with R-E learning when the effects in the acquisition phase were identical to the stimuli in the test phase, we did not observe evidence for generalization. We discuss this with regard to recent studies suggesting that individual response biases might rather reflect rapidly inferred propositional knowledge instead of learned R-E associations.
引用
收藏
页码:135 / 144
页数:10
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1990, SAS/STAT Users Guide, V2
[2]   Effect anticipation and action control [J].
Elsner, B ;
Hommel, B .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 2001, 27 (01) :229-240
[3]   Exploring the representational basis of response-effect compatibility: Evidence from bilingual verbal response-effect mappings [J].
Foeldes, Noemi ;
Philipp, Andrea M. ;
Badets, Arnaud ;
Koch, Iring .
ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA, 2018, 186 :1-7
[4]   Assessing bimodality to detect the presence of a dual cognitive process [J].
Freeman, Jonathan B. ;
Dale, Rick .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2013, 45 (01) :83-97
[5]   SENSORY FEEDBACK MECHANISMS IN PERFORMANCE CONTROL - WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO IDEO-MOTOR MECHANISM [J].
GREENWALD, AG .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1970, 77 (02) :73-99
[6]  
Harlebeta E., 1861, Z F R PHILOSOPHIE PH, V38, P50, DOI DOI 10.1524/9783050047652.21
[7]   Two modes of sensorimotor integration in intention-based and stimulus-based actions [J].
Herwig, Arvid ;
Prinz, Wolfgang ;
Waszak, Florian .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2007, 60 (11) :1540-1554
[8]   Acquisition and generalization of action effects [J].
Hommel, B ;
Alonso, D ;
Fuentes, L .
VISUAL COGNITION, 2003, 10 (08) :965-986
[9]  
James William, 1890, Principles of Psychology
[10]   Perception and action as viewed from the Theory of Event Coding: a multi-lab replication and effect size estimation of common experimental designs [J].
Janczyk, Markus ;
Giesen, Carina G. ;
Moeller, Birte ;
Dignath, David ;
Pfister, Roland .
PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH-PSYCHOLOGISCHE FORSCHUNG, 2023, 87 (04) :1012-1042