Human and animal perceptual learning: Some common and some unique features

Mitchell, Chris

doi:10.3758/lb.37.2.154

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One difference between human and animal experiments is that the former have relied largely on the generalization test as a measure of perceptual discriminability, whereas the latter have usually used more direct measures (e.g., a same-different task or the ability to detect a discriminating feature). The potential problem here is that, generalization of a conditioned response will be affected by factors, such as the strength of the association responsible for that response, that are unrelated to perceived stimulus similarity (see Mitchell, 2009). Only when these other factors are carefully controlled will the results of a generalization test give information relevant to understanding performance on (e.g.)…”

Section: Perceptual Learning In Animals: Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can theories of animal discrimination explain perceptual learning in humans?

Mitchell¹,

Hall²

2014

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a review of recent studies of perceptual learning conducted with nonhuman animals. The focus of this research has been to elucidate the mechanisms by which mere exposure to a pair of similar stimuli can increase the ease with which those stimuli are discriminated. These studies establish an important role for 2 mechanisms, one involving inhibitory associations between the unique features of the stimuli, the other involving a long-term habituation process that enhances the relative salience of these features. We then examine recent work investigating equivalent perceptual learning procedures with human participants. Our aim is to determine the extent to which the phenomena exhibited by people are susceptible to explanation in terms of the mechanisms revealed by the animal studies. Although we find no evidence that associative inhibition contributes to the perceptual learning effect in humans, initial detection of unique features (those that allow discrimination between 2 similar stimuli) appears to depend on an habituation process. Once the unique features have been detected, a tendency to attend to those features and to learn about their properties enhances subsequent discrimination. We conclude that the effects obtained with humans engage mechanisms additional to those seen in animals but argue that, for the most part, these have their basis in learning processes that are common to animals and people. In a final section, we discuss some implications of this analysis of perceptual learning for other aspects of experimental psychology and consider some potential applications.

show abstract

Section: Perceptual Learning In Animals: Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can theories of animal discrimination explain perceptual learning in humans?

Mitchell¹,

Hall²

2014

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is possible, however, that generalization of this kind does not, in fact, reflect the discriminability of the stimuli. Two stimuli may be perceived to be very different but be treated as functionally equivalent (they may be associated with one another) and therefore support a high level of generalization (see Mitchell, 2009, for a fuller discussion of this issue). Lavis and Mitchell (2006) therefore used a same-different test to provide a more direct measurement of participants' ability to perceive differences between stimuli.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Attention and relative novelty in human perceptual learning.

Wang

Mitchell

2011

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four experiments examined the role of attention in human perceptual learning. In Experiment 1, participants were preexposed to a pair of visual (checkerboard) stimuli AX and BX, with common elements X and unique features A and B. A same-different task was then used to assess discrimination of AX and BX and a pair of control stimuli, CY and DY. In addition, participants' eye movements were recorded to assess the role of attentional processes. The results showed that preexposure enhanced discrimination between AX and BX. Furthermore, participants showed greater attention to the preexposed unique features A and B than to the novel unique features C and D, as measured by the eye gaze monitor. Experiments 2 and 3 examined the prediction that perceptual learning is due to the relative familiarity of the common and unique stimulus features. Experiment 4 replicated the intermixed-blocked effect and showed that the way in which AX and BX are presented is also important for perceptual learning. The results generally support the idea that intermixed preexposure to AX and BX increases attention to the unique stimulus features A and B. Some aspects of the results are consistent with a relative novelty account, whereas others implicate a high-level attentional process that is not driven by stimulus novelty.

show abstract

“…As a result, X will evoke both A and B but, as A predicts the absence of B in AX trials and B the absence of A in BX trials, inhibitory links will be formed between A and B and this will lead to reduced generalization between the two compounds (that in turn leads to better discrimination between AX and BX). One can argue that the higher discriminability of A and B could account for the results seen here, but it is not clear how mutual inhibition between the two unique features would result in better memory performance in the recognition memory task (also, see Mitchell, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Memory encoding of stimulus features in human perceptual learning

Carvalho

Albuquerque

2012

Journal of Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments analyzed memory encoding in human perceptual learning. Both experiments started with preexposure without feedback to four checkerboards composed by a unique feature each and sharing a common feature (AX, BX, CX and DX). Elements of one pair were presented intermixed and elements of the other pair were presented in separate blocks. Immediately after preexposure participants completed a memory recognition task in which the characteristics of the distractors were manipulated. Experiment 1 showed that only intermixed presentation results in good encoding of the unique features of the stimuli. Experiment 2 demonstrated that intermixed preexposure results in different encoding of unique vs. common features of the stimuli: Participants are able to remember A and B better then they remember X, while for the blocked condition memory for C, D and X does not differ. Overall, the results presented here support the proposal that intermixing stimuli results in differential memory traces for unique vs. common features and that contributes to the intermixed/blocked effect.

show abstract

Human and animal perceptual learning: Some common and some unique features

Cited by 7 publications

References 27 publications

Can theories of animal discrimination explain perceptual learning in humans?

Can theories of animal discrimination explain perceptual learning in humans?

Attention and relative novelty in human perceptual learning.

Memory encoding of stimulus features in human perceptual learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About