Abstract
Abstract. In a contingency learning task, 4-year-old and 8-year-old children had to predict the outcome displayed on the back of a card on the basis of cues presented on the front. The task was embedded in either a causal or a merely predictive scenario. Within this task, either a forward blocking or a backward blocking procedure was implemented. Blocking occurred in the causal but not in the predictive scenario. Moreover, blocking was affected by the scenario to the same extent in both age groups. The pattern of results was similar for forward and backward blocking. These results suggest that even young children are sensitive to the causal structure of a contingency learning task and that the occurrence of blocking in such a task defies an explanation in terms of associative learning theory.
References
(2005). Outcome additivity and outcome maximality influence cue competition in human causal learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 238– 249
(1982). The development of causal reasoning. In W. J. Friedman (Ed.), The developmental psychology of time (pp. 209-254). New York: Academic Press.
(2002). A review of recent developments in research and theories on human contingency learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55B, 289– 310
(2003). Secondary task difficulty modulates forward blocking in human contingency learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56B, 345– 357
(2002). Outcome and cue properties modulate blocking. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 965– 985
(2005). Evidence for the role of higher-order reasoning processes in cue competition and other learning phenomena. Learning & Behavior, 33, 239– 249
(2001). The extended comparator hypothesis: Learning by contiguity, responding by relative strength. In R. R. Mowrer & S. B. Klein (Eds.), Handbook of contemporary learning theories (pp. 65-117). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(2001). The 28th Bartlett memorial lecture: Causal learning: An associative analysis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54B, 3– 25
(1996). Within-compound associations mediate the retrospective revaluation of causality judgements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49B, 60– 80
(1984). Judgement of act-outcome contingency: The role of selective attribution. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 29– 50
(2004). A theory of causal learning in children: Causal maps and Bayes nets. Psychological Review, 111, 3– 32
(1969). Predictability, surprise, attention, and conditioning. In R. M. Church (Ed.), Punishment and aversive behaviour (pp. 279-296). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
(2003). Forward and backward blocking of causal judgement is enhanced by additivity of effect magnitude. Memory & Cognition, 31, 133– 142
(1988). The comparator hypothesis: A response rule for the expression of associations. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 22, pp. 51-92). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
(2000). Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(2005). Contrasting predictive and causal values of predictors and of causes. Learning & Behavior, 33, 184– 196
(1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory (pp. 64-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
(1999). Seeing it happen and knowing how it works: How children understand the relation between perceptual causality and underlying mechanism. Developmental Psychology, 35, 303– 317
(1985). Forward and backward blocking in human contingency judgement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37B, 1– 21
(1982). Rules of causal attribution. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 47, 1– 51
(2004). Children’s causal inferences from indirect evidence: Backward blocking and Bayesian reasoning in preschoolers. Cognitive Science, 28, 303– 333
(2003). Theory-based causal inference. In S. Beckers, S. Thrun, & K. Obermayer (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 Neural Information Processing Systems Conference (pp. 35-42). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Forward cue competition in human causal learning: A comparison between forward blocking and reduced overshadowing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,
in pressFurther evidence for the role of inferential reasoning in forward blocking. Memory & Cognition,
in press(1994). Cue competition in causality judgements: The role of nonpresentation of compound stimulus elements. Learning & Motivation, 25, 127– 151
(1981). SOP. A model of automatic memory processing in animal behavior. In N. E. Spear & R. R. Miller (Eds.), Information processing in animals: Memory mechanisms (pp. 5-47). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
(1996). Knowledge-based causal induction. In D. R. Shanks, K. J. Holyoak, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation, Vol. 34: Causal learning (pp. 47-88). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
(2000). Competition among causes but not effects in predictive and diagnostic learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 53– 76
(2001). Predictive versus diagnostic causal learning: Evidence from an overshadowing paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 600– 608
(1992). Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 22– 236
(1998). A Bayesian network model of causal learning. In Gernsbacher & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1102-1107). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2005). Competence and performance in causal learning. Learning & Behavior, 33, 211– 229
(2004). Children’s sensitivity to structural implications of causal models. Manuscript submitted for publication.
(1994). Configural and elemental strategies in predictive learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 694– 709