A dissociation between causal judgement and the ease with which a cause is categorized with its effect

The associative view of human causal learning argues that causation is attributed to the extent that the putative cause activates, via an association, a mental representation of the effect. That is, causal learning is a human analogue of animal conditioning. We tested this associative theory using a task in which a fictitious character suffered from two allergic reactions, rash (O1) and headache (O2). In a conditioned inhibition design with each of these two outcomes (A–O1/AX– and B–O2/BY–), participants were trained that one herbal remedy (X) prevented O1 and that the other (Y) prevented O2. These inhibitory properties were revealed in a causal judgement summation test. In a subsequent categorization task, X was most easily categorized with O1, and Y with O2. Thus, the categorization data indicated an excitatory X–O1 and Y–O2 association, the reverse of the inhibitory relationship observed on the causal judgement measure. A second experiment showed that this pattern of excitation and inhibition is dependent on intermixed A–O1 and AX– trials. These results are problematic for the standard application of associative activation theories to causal judgement. We argue instead that the inhibition revealed in the causal judgement task reflects inferential reasoning, which relies, in part, on the ability of the cue in question to excite a representation of the outcome, as revealed in the categorization test.

CS-US interval determines the transition from overshadowing to potentiation with flavor compounds

The present series of five flavor aversion experiments with rat subjects examined compound conditioning at varying CS-US intervals. Using a taste-taste design, Experiments 1A and 1B demonstrated overshadowing at a 0-min CS-US interval and potentiation at a 120-min CS-US interval, and these effects occurred with both tastes of the compound. Experiment 2 showed that the aversion to a single element is reduced when the CS-US interval is increased to 120 min, but the aversion for a compound taste is not. Experiments 3A and 3B explored odor + taste compound conditioning; the results demonstrated odor potentiation across the trace interval and a transition from taste overshadowing to taste potentiation. Collectively, the data show that the change from overshadowing to potentiation was not due to changes in the aversions produced by compound conditioning but, instead, was due to a more rapid loss of conditionability across a trace interval prior to the US in single-element conditioning. These experiments suggest that following compound conditioning, the aversion to each element represents generalization decrement from the configured compound, but the designation of overshadowing or potentiation actually depends on the status of conditioning in the single-element control.

Within-compound associations are not sufficient to produce taste-mediated odor potentiation

Rats were used in two flavor-aversion experiments to determine if within-compound associations could be detected with a taste+odor compound that would not support taste-mediated odor potentation. In Experiment 1, following taste+odor compound conditioning, postconditioning taste extinction significantly weakened the odor aversion. In Experiment 2, following taste+odor compound conditioning, postconditioning taste inflation significantly strengthened the odor aversion. There was no evidence that taste potentiated the odor aversion in either Experiment 1 or 2. Thus, the results demonstrate that the presence of within-compound associations is not sufficient to produce taste-mediated odor potentiation. We offer a mediated conditioning explanation to account for the results of these two experiments.

Limitations on representation-mediated potentiation of flavour or odour aversions

Odour aversion learning is often potentiated in the presence of flavour stimuli. Establishment of an aversion to an odour is greater when an odour + flavour compound is paired with illness than when the odour alone is paired with illness. Holland (1983) showed that under some circumstances auditory or olfactory stimuli previously paired with flavours may also potentiate odour aversion learning. The present experiments examined limitations on this representation-mediated potentiation of aversion learning. The results indicated that conditioned stimuli (CSs) that activate representations of potentiating cues are themselves immune to potentiation by other CS-activated representations, but remain susceptible to potentiation by their real stimulus associates.

A dissociation between causal judgment and outcome recall

It has been suggested that causal learning in humans is similar to Pavlovian conditioning in animals. According to this view, judgments of cause reflect the degree to which an association exists between the cause and the effect. Inferential accounts, by contrast, suggest that causal judgments are reasoning based rather than associative in nature. We used a direct measure of associative strength, identification of the outcome with which a cause was paired (cued recall), to see whether associative strength translated directly into causal ratings. Causal compounds AB+ and CD+ were intermixed withA+ and C- training. Cued-recall performance was better for cue B than for cue D; thus, associative strength was inherited by cue B from the strongly associated cue A (augmentation). However, the reverse was observed on the causal judgment measure: Cue B was judged to be less causal than D (cue competition). These results support an inferential over an associative account of causal judgments.

Olfactory blocking and odorant similarity in the honeybee

Blocking occurs when previous training with a stimulus A reduces (blocks) subsequent learning about a stimulus B, when A and B are trained in compound. The question of whether blocking exists in olfactory conditioning of proboscis extension reflex (PER) in honeybees is under debate. The last published accounts on blocking in honeybees state that blocking occurs when odors A and B are similar (the "similarity hypothesis"). We have tested this hypothesis using four odors (1-octanol, 1-nonanol, eugenol, and limonene) chosen on the basis of their chemical and physiological similarity (experiment 1). We established a generalization matrix that measured perceptual similarity. Bees in the "block group" were first trained with an odor A and, in the second phase, with the mixture AB. Bees in the "novel group" (control group) were first trained with an odor N and, in the second phase, with the mixture AB. After conditioning, bees in both groups were tested for their response to B. We assayed all 24 possible combinations for the four odors standing for A, B, and N. We found blocking in four cases, augmentation in two cases, and no difference in 18 cases; odor similarity could not account for these results. We also repeated the experiments with those six odor combinations that gave rise to the similarity hypothesis (experiment 2: 1-hexanol, 1-octanol, geraniol) and found augmentation in one and no effect in five cases. Thus, blocking is not a consistent phenomenon, nor does it depend on odor similarity.

Taste + odor interactions in compound aversion conditioning

In three experiments with rats, taste + odor interactions in compound aversion conditioning were investigated. In Experiment 1, two odors (0.02% almond and 0.02% orange) were compared on single-element odor aversions, taste (denatonium) potentiated odor aversions, and potentiated odor aversions following taste extinction. Although no odor differences were seen following single-element conditioning, both types of potentiated orange odor aversions were stronger than their almond odor counterparts. These data show that odors of similar conditionability are differentially potentiated by the same taste. To determine whether these differences were due to unique perceptual representations, the effects of elemental extinction or compound extinction on aversions to the compound were investigated in Experiments 2 and 3. In Experiment 2, orange odor extinction weakened responding to the compound significantly more than taste extinction did. In contrast, almond odor extinction and taste extinction produced similar decrements in responding to the compound in Experiment 3. These results suggest that the perceptual representation of these specific taste + odor compounds are different, and they are discussed in regard to configural and within-compound association accounts of potentiation.

Effects of postconditioning inflation on odor + taste compound conditioning

The within-compound association approach has been proposed as an account of synergistic conditioning in flavor aversion learning. One prediction from the within-compound association approach is that following taste + odor compound conditioning, postconditioning inflation of one element of the compound should increase responding to the second element. In four experiments with rats, the AX+/A+ design was used to determine whether postconditioning inflation of A would increase responding to X. In Experiments 1 and 3, responding to X was significantly stronger after AX+/A+ conditioning, as compared with AX+ conditioning. In Experiments 2 and 4, the specificity of the inflation effect was demonstrated, because AX+/A+ conditioning produced a stronger aversion to X than did AX+/B+ conditioning. Furthermore, it appears that the taste + odor association is symmetrical because inflation of the taste aversion increased responding to the odor (Experiments 1 and 2) and inflation of the odor aversion increased responding to the taste (Experiments 3 and 4).