What Are Association Formation Models Good For?
De Houwer, Jan, Learning & Behavior
Dickinson (2009) agrees with two of the core claims that were made in my target article (De Houwer, 2009): Associative learning effects (often) depend on (1) the formation of propositions and (2) the operation of nonautomatic processes. Whereas I derived these claims from propositional models of learning, Dickinson (2009) argues that they are also compatible with association formation models (AFMs). He also defends the position that only AFMs can explain "nonrational responses to associative experiences." In this comment, I question whether there is much value in continuing to cling to AFMs.
In the first part of his comment, Dickinson (2009) discusses earlier work (Dickinson, …
The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia
Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:
- Questia's entire collection
- Automatic bibliography creation
- More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
- Ad-free environment
Already a member? Log in now.
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information:
Article title: What Are Association Formation Models Good For?.
Contributors: De Houwer, Jan - Author.
Journal title: Learning & Behavior.
Volume: 37.
Issue: 1
Publication date: February 2009.
Page number: 25+.
© Psychonomic Society, Inc. Feb 2009.
Provided by ProQuest LLC. All Rights Reserved.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.
One moment ...
- Georgia
- Arial
- Times New Roman
- Verdana
- Courier/monospaced
Reset