Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T20:15:27.386Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rational models of conditioning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2009

Nick Chater
Nick Chater
Affiliation:
Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom. [email protected]://www.psychol.ucl.ac.uk/people/profiles/chater_nick.htm
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mitchell et al. argue that conditioning phenomena may be better explained by high-level, rational processes, rather than by non-cognitive associative mechanisms. This commentary argues that this viewpoint is compatible with neuroscientific data, may extend to nonhuman animals, and casts computational models of reinforcement learning in a new light.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , April 2009 , pp. 204 - 205
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999) The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist 54:462–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chater, N. (2003) How much can we learn from double dissociations? Cortex 39:167–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chater, N. (in press) Rational and mechanistic perspectives on reinforcement learning. Cognition.Google Scholar
Courville, A. C., Daw, N. D. & Touretzky, D. S. (2006) Bayesian theories of conditioning in a changing world. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10:294–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coutureau, E. & Killcross, S. (2003) Inactivation of the infralimbic prefrontal cortex reinstates goal-directed responding in overtrained rats. Behavioural Brain Research 146:167–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cunningham, W. A. & Zelazo, P. D. (2007) Attitudes and evaluations: A social cognitive neuroscience perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11:97–104.Google Scholar
Dayan, P. & Abbott, L. F. (2001) Theoretical neuroscience. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. (1994) Integration of the cognitive and psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist 49:709–24.Google Scholar
Gallistel, C. R., Balsam, P. D. & Fairhurst, S. (2004) The learning curve: Implications of a quantitative analysis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 101:13124–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gopnik, A. & Schulz, L. eds. (2007) Causal learning: Psychology, philosophy, and computation. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jog, M. S., Kubota, Y., Connolly, C. I., Hillegaart, V. & Graybiel, A. M. (1999) Building neural representations of habits. Science 286:1745–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kamin, L. J. (1969) Predictability, surprise attention and conditioning. In: Punishment and aversive behaviour, ed. Campbell, B. A. & Church, R. M., pp. 279–96. Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Killcross, S. & Coutureau, E. (2003) Coordination of actions and habits in the medial prefrontal cortex of rats. Cerebral Cortex 13:400–08.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mackintosh, N. J. (1983) Conditioning and associative learning. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McClure, S. M., Laibson, D. I., Loewenstein, G. & Cohen, J. D. (2004) Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science 306:503–07.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pearl, J. (1988) Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Pizzagalli, D. A., Eden Evins, A., Cowman Schetter, E., Frank, M. J., Pajtas, P. E., Santesso, D. L. & Culhane, M. (2008) Single dose of a dopamine agonist impairs reinforcement learning in humans: Behavioral evidence from a laboratory-based measure of reward responsiveness. Psychopharmacology 196:221–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shallice, T. (1988) From neuropsychology to mental structure. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1983) Extension versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review 90:293–315.Google Scholar
Wasserman, E. A. & Zentall, T. R., eds. (2006) Animal cognition: Experimental exploration of animal intelligence. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar