Cited by 243Free Will and AgencyMotor Control and AdaptationNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Contiguity and contingency in action-effect learning

Elsner, Birgit, Hommel, Bernhard·2004·Psychological Research

Abstract

According to the two-stage model of voluntary action, the ability to perform voluntary action is acquired in two sequential steps. Firstly, associations are acquired between representations of movements and of the effects that frequently follow them. Secondly, the anticipation or perception of an acquired action effect primes the movement that has been learnt to produce this effect; the acquired action-effect associations thus mediate the selection of actions that are most appropriate to achieve an intended action goal. If action-effect learning has an associative basis, it should be influenced by factors that are known to affect instrumental learning, such as the temporal contiguity and the probabilistic contingency of movement and effect. In two experiments, the contiguity or the contingency between key presses and subsequent tones was manipulated in various ways. As expected, both factors affected the acquisition of action-effect relations as assessed by the potency of action effects to prime the corresponding action in a later behavioral test. In particular, evidence of action-effect associations was obtained only if the effect of the action was delayed for no more than 1 s, if the effect appeared more often in the presence than in the absence of the action, or if action and effect were entirely uncorrelated but the effect appeared very often. These findings support the assumption that the control of voluntary actions is based on action-effect representations that are acquired by associative learning mechanisms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00426-003-0151-8

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Associative learning depends not only on contiguity but also on contingency, the degree to which one event reliably predicts the other.

    “It has long been recognized that associative learning depends, not only on contiguity - events occurring close together in time - but also on contingency - the degree to which one event reliably predicts the other.”

    From Mirror neurons: from origin to function (2014) · cites this paper as Elsner & Hommel, 2004

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Elsner, B., & Hommel, B.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
  • Leiden University (NL)
Corresponding author
Elsner, Birgit
Venue
Psychological Research
Published
2004-04-01
Volume
68
Issue
2-3
Pages
138-154
ISSN
  • 0033-3026 (ISSN-L)
  • 0340-0727
  • 1430-2772
OpenAlex
W2031394184
Cited by
243
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 27
FWCI
3.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
action-effect learning, temporal contiguity, associative learning, operant conditioning, voluntary action, action-effect associations, movement anticipation, action selection
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Single-Blind Method

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review