Disentangling semantic and response learning effects in color-word contingency learning

Abstract

It is easier to indicate the ink color of a color-neutral noun when it is presented in the color in which it had been shown frequently before, relative to print colors in which it had been shown less often. This phenomenon is known as color-word-contingency learning. It remains unclear whether participants actually learn semantic (word-color) associations or/and response (word-button) associations. We present a novel variant of the paradigm that can disentangle semantic and response learning, because word-color and word-button associations are manipulated independently. In four experiments, each involving four daily sessions, novel words (pseudowords such as enas, fatu or imot) were probabilistically associated either with a particular color, a particular responsebutton position, or with both. Neutral trials were also included, and participants' awareness of the contingencies was manipulated. The data showed no impact of explicit contingency awareness, but clear evidence both for response learning and for semantic learning, with effects emerging swiftly. Deeper processing of color information, with color words presented in black instead of color patches to indicate response-button positions, resulted in stronger effects, both for semantic and response learning. Our data add a crucial piece of evidence lacking so far in color-word contingency learning studies: Semantic learning effectively takes place even when associations are learned in an incidental way.

Incidental learning in music reading: The music contingency learning task

“…In particular, we hypothesise that participants may be able to acquire the associations between note positions and note names, along with the corresponding actions (i.e., which note to play) with similar efficiency. Indeed, learning in this type of incidental learning procedure primarily involves the learning of the association between the task-irrelevant stimulus (in the experiments to be described shortly: the note position) and the response to make (e.g., the key to press on a keyboard), or stimulus–response learning (Geukes et al, 2019; Miller, 1987; Schmidt et al, 2007; Schmidt & De Houwer, 2012b, 2016a). This is particularly interesting in the context of sight reading, where automatisation of the association between the note position and the action to perform on the instrument is needed.…”