Human Learning About Causation

Baetu, Irina; Baker, A. G.

doi:10.1002/9781118650813.ch15

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 94 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For all individual CS present on a learning trial, changes in CS-US associative value (∆V) are determined by the difference between the actual magnitude of US on that trial (l, ranging 0-1) and the summed associative value of all present CS (SV). By itself, this subtraction (l -SV) represents mismatches of actual versus expected outcomes, considered a formal representation of 'surprisingness' or 'prediction error' (Baetu & Baker, 2016). Because organisms rarely acquire total learning on a single stimulus pairing however, which is why the model includes one or more fixed learning rate parameters (ab, ranging 0-1), which weight prediction error's overall impact.…”

Section: Formal Learning Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The role of prediction error in learning can be restated as the gradual minimization of surprisingness or uncertainty (Baetu & Baker, 2016;den Ouden et al, 2009;Friston, 2010). PEs are evoked early on, then minimized over time, until predictions about a cue-outcome relationship are no longer in error.…”

Section: Safety Prediction Error: Turning Nothing Into Somethingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pavlovian safety learning: an integrative theoretical review

Laing,

Vervliet,

Dunsmoor

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Safety learning involves associating stimuli with the absence of threats, enabling the inhibition of fear and anxiety. Despite growing interest in psychology, psychiatry, and neuroscience research, safety learning lacks a formal consensus definition, leading to inconsistent methodologies and varied results. Conceptualized as a form of inhibitory learning (conditioned inhibition), safety learning can be understood through formal learning theories, such as the Rescorla-Wagner and Pearce-Hall models. This review aims to establish a principled conceptualization of ‘Pavlovian safety learning’, identifying cognitive mechanisms that generate it safety, and boundary conditions that constrain it. Based on these observations, we define Pavlovian safety learning as an active associative process, where surprising threat- omission (safety prediction error) acts as a salient reinforcing event. Instead of producing neutral or non-aversive states, the safety learning process endows stimuli with positive association to ‘safety’. The resulting stimulus-safety memories counteract the influence of fear memories, promoting fear regulation, positive affect, and relief. We critically analyze traditional criteria of conditioned inhibition for their relevance to safety and propose areas for future innovation. A principled concept of Pavlovian safety learning may reduce methodological inconsistencies, stimulate translational research, and facilitate a comprehensive understanding of an indispensable psychological construct.

show abstract

Section: Formal Learning Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Safety Prediction Error: Turning Nothing Into Somethingmentioning

confidence: 99%