
Failures to replicate blocking are surprising and informative—Reply to Soto (2018).
Author(s) -
Elke Maes,
AngelosMiltiadis Krypotos,
Yannick Boddez,
Joaquín M. Alfei,
Rudi D’Hooge,
Jan De Houwer,
Tom Beckers
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of experimental psychology. general
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.521
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1939-2222
pISSN - 0096-3445
DOI - 10.1037/xge0000413
Subject(s) - blocking (statistics) , salience (neuroscience) , associative property , replicate , cognitive psychology , computer science , generalization , cognitive science , associative learning , psychology , artificial intelligence , epistemology , mathematics , statistics , philosophy , computer network , pure mathematics
The blocking effect has inspired numerous associative learning theories and is widely cited in the literature. We recently reported a series of 15 experiments that failed to obtain a blocking effect in rodents. On the basis of those consistent failures, we claimed that there is a lack of insight into the boundary conditions for blocking. In his commentary, Soto (2018) argued that contemporary associative learning theory does provide a specific boundary condition for the occurrence of blocking, namely the use of same- versus different-modality stimuli. Given that in 10 of our 15 experiments same-modality stimuli were used, he claims that our failure to observe a blocking effect is unsurprising. We disagree with that claim, because of theoretical, empirical, and statistical problems with his analysis. We also address 2 other possible reasons for a lack of blocking that are referred to in Soto's (2018) analysis, related to generalization and salience, and dissect the potential importance of both. Although Soto's (2018) analyses raise a number of interesting points, we see more merit in an empirically guided analysis and call for empirical testing of boundary conditions on blocking. (PsycINFO Database Record