Contiguity and contingency in action-effect learning
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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
Hebb, D. O. (2005) · doi:10.4324/9781410612403 · Cited by 9,825 · see citing works
Perception and Action Planning
Prinz, W. (1997) · European Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/713752551 · Cited by 2,013 · see citing works
Self-perception and action in infancy
Rochat, P. (1998) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/s002210050550 · Cited by 282 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The short-latency dopamine signal: a role in discovering novel actions?
Redgrave, P., & Gurney, K. (2006) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2022 · Cited by 762 · see citing works
Mirror neurons: from origin to function
Cook, R., Bird, G., Catmur, C., Press, C., & Heyes, C. (2014) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x13000903 · Cited by 632 · see citing works
Associative theories of goal-directed behaviour: a case for animal–human translational models
Wit, S., & Dickinson, A. (2009) · Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung · doi:10.1007/s00426-009-0230-6 · Cited by 424 · see citing works
Two Modes of Sensorimotor Integration in Intention-Based and Stimulus-Based Actions
Herwig, A., Prinz, W., & Waszak, F. (2007) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470210601119134 · Cited by 192 · see citing works
Stimulus-outcome interactions during instrumental discrimination learning by rats and humans.
de Wit, S., Niry, D., Wariyar, R., Aitken, M. R. F., & Dickinson, A. (2007) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes · doi:10.1037/0097-7403.33.1.1 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Acquisition of automatic imitation is sensitive to sensorimotor contingency.
Cook, R., Press, C., Dickinson, A., & Heyes, C. (2010) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/a0019256 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
ABC: A Psychological Theory of Anticipative Behavioral Control
Hoffmann, J. (2009) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-02565-5_2 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- 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
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- 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