Dissociating the roles of episodic retrieval and contingency awareness in valence contingency learning.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognition & Emotion Pub Date : 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1080/02699931.2025.2456608
Carina G Giesen, Hannah Duderstadt, Jasmin Richter, Klaus Rothermund
{"title":"Dissociating the roles of episodic retrieval and contingency awareness in valence contingency learning.","authors":"Carina G Giesen, Hannah Duderstadt, Jasmin Richter, Klaus Rothermund","doi":"10.1080/02699931.2025.2456608","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the valence contingency learning task (VCT), participants evaluate target words which are preceded by nonwords. Nonwords are predictive for positive/negative evaluations. Previous studies demonstrated that this results in (a) reliable contingency learning effects, reflected in better performance for highly contingent nonword-valence pairings and (b) less reliable evaluative conditioning (EC) effects, reflected in more positive ratings of nonwords that were highly predictive of positive (vs. negative) evaluative responses. In a highly-powered (<i>N </i>= 129) preregistered study, we investigated both effects and assessed whether they are a consequence of episodic retrieval of incidental stimulus-response (SR) episodes and/or propositional learning (indicated by contingency awareness). Participants were either explicitly instructed about contingencies (<i>instructed learning group</i>) or not (<i>incidental learning group</i>). Both groups then worked through the VCT, an explicit rating task, and a contingency awareness test. Both groups showed contingency learning effects and EC effects for nonwords. Multi-level analyses showed that controlling for previous SR co-occurrences fully accounted for contingency learning effects in the incidental learning group. In the instructed learning group, a residual effect of genuine valence contingency learning remained. Nonword-specific contingency awareness in turn fully accounted for EC effects in both learning groups, indicating that genuine contingency learning effects reflect propositional learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":48412,"journal":{"name":"Cognition & Emotion","volume":" ","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition & Emotion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2025.2456608","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the valence contingency learning task (VCT), participants evaluate target words which are preceded by nonwords. Nonwords are predictive for positive/negative evaluations. Previous studies demonstrated that this results in (a) reliable contingency learning effects, reflected in better performance for highly contingent nonword-valence pairings and (b) less reliable evaluative conditioning (EC) effects, reflected in more positive ratings of nonwords that were highly predictive of positive (vs. negative) evaluative responses. In a highly-powered (N = 129) preregistered study, we investigated both effects and assessed whether they are a consequence of episodic retrieval of incidental stimulus-response (SR) episodes and/or propositional learning (indicated by contingency awareness). Participants were either explicitly instructed about contingencies (instructed learning group) or not (incidental learning group). Both groups then worked through the VCT, an explicit rating task, and a contingency awareness test. Both groups showed contingency learning effects and EC effects for nonwords. Multi-level analyses showed that controlling for previous SR co-occurrences fully accounted for contingency learning effects in the incidental learning group. In the instructed learning group, a residual effect of genuine valence contingency learning remained. Nonword-specific contingency awareness in turn fully accounted for EC effects in both learning groups, indicating that genuine contingency learning effects reflect propositional learning.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition & Emotion
Cognition & Emotion PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: Cognition & Emotion is devoted to the study of emotion, especially to those aspects of emotion related to cognitive processes. The journal aims to bring together work on emotion undertaken by researchers in cognitive, social, clinical, and developmental psychology, neuropsychology, and cognitive science. Examples of topics appropriate for the journal include the role of cognitive processes in emotion elicitation, regulation, and expression; the impact of emotion on attention, memory, learning, motivation, judgements, and decisions.
期刊最新文献
Emotion malleability beliefs prompt cognitive reappraisal: evidence from an online longitudinal intervention for adolescents. Dissociating the roles of episodic retrieval and contingency awareness in valence contingency learning. For better or for worse: differential effects of the emotional valence of words on children's recall. Metacognitive confidence and affect - two sides of the same coin? From "isolation" to "me-time": linguistic shifts enhance solitary experiences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1