Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Relative salience versus relative validity

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Relative salience versus relative validity: Cue salience influences blocking in human associative learning

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Relative salience versus relative validity: Cue salience influences blocking in human associative learning. / Le Pelley, M.E.; Beesley, T.; Griffiths, O.
In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2014, p. 116-132.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Le Pelley, ME, Beesley, T & Griffiths, O 2014, 'Relative salience versus relative validity: Cue salience influences blocking in human associative learning', Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 116-132. https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000006

APA

Le Pelley, M. E., Beesley, T., & Griffiths, O. (2014). Relative salience versus relative validity: Cue salience influences blocking in human associative learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 40(1), 116-132. https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000006

Vancouver

Le Pelley ME, Beesley T, Griffiths O. Relative salience versus relative validity: Cue salience influences blocking in human associative learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes. 2014;40(1):116-132. doi: 10.1037/xan0000006

Author

Le Pelley, M.E. ; Beesley, T. ; Griffiths, O. / Relative salience versus relative validity : Cue salience influences blocking in human associative learning. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes. 2014 ; Vol. 40, No. 1. pp. 116-132.

Bibtex

@article{c729f535b48e43f7842588e95d2de923,
title = "Relative salience versus relative validity: Cue salience influences blocking in human associative learning",
abstract = "Two studies of human contingency learning investigated the influence of stimulus salience on the cue competition effect of blocking. These studies demonstrated that blocking (defined as a difference in responding to blocked and control cues) was greater for target cues that had high “semantic salience” than those of lower salience. Moreover participants showed weaker responding to high salience blocked cues than low salience blocked cues, but a corresponding difference was not observed for control cues. These findings suggest that the influence of relative salience on associative learning depends on the relative validity of the cues in question. Use of eye tracking in Experiment 2 demonstrated that participants{\textquoteright} overt attention to cues was also influenced by both relative salience and relative validity. We describe three associative learning models, based on the attentional theory proposed by Mackintosh (1975), that are able to account for our key findings.",
author = "{Le Pelley}, M.E. and T. Beesley and O. Griffiths",
note = "cited By 2",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1037/xan0000006",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "116--132",
journal = "Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes",
issn = "0097-7403",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Relative salience versus relative validity

T2 - Cue salience influences blocking in human associative learning

AU - Le Pelley, M.E.

AU - Beesley, T.

AU - Griffiths, O.

N1 - cited By 2

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Two studies of human contingency learning investigated the influence of stimulus salience on the cue competition effect of blocking. These studies demonstrated that blocking (defined as a difference in responding to blocked and control cues) was greater for target cues that had high “semantic salience” than those of lower salience. Moreover participants showed weaker responding to high salience blocked cues than low salience blocked cues, but a corresponding difference was not observed for control cues. These findings suggest that the influence of relative salience on associative learning depends on the relative validity of the cues in question. Use of eye tracking in Experiment 2 demonstrated that participants’ overt attention to cues was also influenced by both relative salience and relative validity. We describe three associative learning models, based on the attentional theory proposed by Mackintosh (1975), that are able to account for our key findings.

AB - Two studies of human contingency learning investigated the influence of stimulus salience on the cue competition effect of blocking. These studies demonstrated that blocking (defined as a difference in responding to blocked and control cues) was greater for target cues that had high “semantic salience” than those of lower salience. Moreover participants showed weaker responding to high salience blocked cues than low salience blocked cues, but a corresponding difference was not observed for control cues. These findings suggest that the influence of relative salience on associative learning depends on the relative validity of the cues in question. Use of eye tracking in Experiment 2 demonstrated that participants’ overt attention to cues was also influenced by both relative salience and relative validity. We describe three associative learning models, based on the attentional theory proposed by Mackintosh (1975), that are able to account for our key findings.

U2 - 10.1037/xan0000006

DO - 10.1037/xan0000006

M3 - Journal article

VL - 40

SP - 116

EP - 132

JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

SN - 0097-7403

IS - 1

ER -