Cited by 457Memory and Neural MechanismsBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Bayesian theories of conditioning in a changing world

Courville, Aaron C., Daw, Nathaniel D., Touretzky, David S.·2006·Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

The recent flowering of Bayesian approaches invites the re-examination of classic issues in behavior, even in areas as venerable as Pavlovian conditioning. A statistical account can offer a new, principled interpretation of behavior, and previous experiments and theories can inform many unexplored aspects of the Bayesian enterprise. Here we consider one such issue: the finding that surprising events provoke animals to learn faster. We suggest that, in a statistical account of conditioning, surprise signals change and therefore uncertainty and the need for new learning. We discuss inference in a world that changes and show how experimental results involving surprise can be interpreted from this perspective, and also how, thus understood, these phenomena help constrain statistical theories of animal and human learning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tics.2006.05.004

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • In Active Inference, generative models are latent cause models that reconstruct the hidden processes jointly responsible for context, sensory and reinforcing events.

    “In terms of Active Inference, this implies that the generative models not only encode associations between stimuli or between conditioned stimuli and reward delivery; rather, they are latent cause models that reconstruct the hidden processes jointly responsible for context, sensory and reinforcing events (Courville et al., 2006).”

    From Active Inference, homeostatic regulation and adaptive behavioural control (2015) · cites this paper as Courville et al., 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Courville, A. C., Daw, N. D., & Touretzky, D. S.
Affiliations
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit (GB)
  • Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition (US)
Corresponding author
Courville, Aaron C.
Venue
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-07
Volume
10
Issue
7
Pages
294-300
ISSN
1364-6613 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2151196108
Cited by
457
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 27
FWCI
0.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Trends in Cognitive Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
Bayesian learning, classical conditioning, surprise, uncertainty, statistical learning, dynamic environments, animal learning, human learning
MeSH terms
Animals, Association Learning, Bayes Theorem, Behavior, Animal, Conditioning, Classical, Extinction, Psychological, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Problem Solving, Reinforcement Schedule, Social Change, Social Environment, Stochastic Processes, Uncertainty

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