Abstract
According to the cycle/trial (C/T) rule, the rate of associative learning is a function of the ratio between the overall rate of U.S. presentation (C) and its rate in the presence of the conditioned stimulus (CS; [T]). This rule is well supported in studies with nonhumans. The present study was conducted to test whether it also applies to human contingency learning. In Experiment 1, participants were exposed to rapid streams of trials. Sensitivity to the cue-outcome contingency varied with both intertrial interval (ITI, which captures C) and cue duration, but the C/T rule was not respected, notably because the effect of ITI was much larger than the effect of cue duration. Experiment 2 showed that mere suppression of verbal strategies did not alter the magnitude of the ITI effect. Experiment 3 replicated Experiment 1 but with cue duration and ITI varied between 1,000 and 3,000 ms instead of between 100 and 1,000 ms. Performance was insensitive to both cue duration and ITI. This was not the consequence of Experiment 3 only varying the cue duration to ITI ratio by a factor of 3; in Experiment 4 where the cue duration was 100 ms, a 300-ms ITI was sufficient to observe an ITI effect. The lack of an ITI effect with a 1,000-ms cue and an ITI varying between 1,000 and 3,000 ms was replicated in Experiment 5. These results are discussed in light of how processes underlying associative learning might break down when events occur very rapidly. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).