2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.lmot.2011.03.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Generalization gradients in human predictive learning: Effects of discrimination training and within-subjects testing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

6
16
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
6
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, they demonstrate that generalization modulates pain reports and—although somewhat less consistently across studies—SCR to pain. This extends previous findings that have shown generalization of threat responses (Dunsmoor, Prince, Murty, Kragel, & LaBar; Lissek et al, 2008; Vervliet, Iberico, Vervoort, & Baeyens, 2011), fear of movement-related pain (e.g., Meulders & Vlaeyen, 2013), and reward learning (Guttman & Kalish, 1956; Kahnt et al, 2012). Second, generalization was observed for both perceptually and conceptually similar stimuli, suggesting that it cannot be explained purely on the basis of a lack of discrimination between CS and generalization stimuli, but that generalization is an active and conceptual process (Dunsmoor & Paz, 2015).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…First, they demonstrate that generalization modulates pain reports and—although somewhat less consistently across studies—SCR to pain. This extends previous findings that have shown generalization of threat responses (Dunsmoor, Prince, Murty, Kragel, & LaBar; Lissek et al, 2008; Vervliet, Iberico, Vervoort, & Baeyens, 2011), fear of movement-related pain (e.g., Meulders & Vlaeyen, 2013), and reward learning (Guttman & Kalish, 1956; Kahnt et al, 2012). Second, generalization was observed for both perceptually and conceptually similar stimuli, suggesting that it cannot be explained purely on the basis of a lack of discrimination between CS and generalization stimuli, but that generalization is an active and conceptual process (Dunsmoor & Paz, 2015).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Further investigation of the relationship between adolescent trajectories and (risk of) adult anxiety is needed; however, our findings support the suggestion that clinical interventions to promote better discrimination between threat and safety cues (Vervliet et al, 2011;Dunsmoor and LaBar, 2013) could prove increasingly useful through adolescence.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 69%
“…Thus interventions to improve discrimination between threat and safety cues (Dunsmoor and LaBar, 2013;Vervliet et al, 2011) might be more effective in alleviating anxiety amongst older adolescents. Future research should also investigate gender differences in adolescent fear responses to safety cues, especially given evidence suggesting adolescent gender differences in PFC activation while viewing fearful faces (YurgelunTodd and Killgore, 2006).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…) affected by the learning context. A steeper gradient reflects highly specific discrimination that can result from discrimination training with two stimuli (a CS+ and a CS−; Jenkins and Harrison, 1960), or from the type of generalization testing procedure adopted (e.g., although generalization gradients could be flat for both CS+ and CS−, extinction may be faster for stimuli more similar to the CS+; Vervliet et al, 2011).…”
Section: Similarity-based Stimulus Generalizationmentioning
confidence: 99%