dc.description.abstract | The current article concerns human outcome-selective Pavlovian-instrumental transfer (PIT),
where Pavlovian cues selectively invigorate instrumental responses that predict common
rewarding outcomes. Several recent experiments have observed PIT effects that were
insensitive to outcome devaluation manipulations, which has been taken as evidence of an
automatic “associative” mechanism. Other similar studies observed PIT effects that were
sensitive to devaluation, which suggests a more controlled, goal-directed process. Studies
supporting the automatic approach have been criticised for using a biased baseline, while
studies supporting the goal-directed approach have been criticised for priming multiple
outcomes at test. The current experiment addressed both of these issues. Participants first
learned to perform two instrumental responses to earn two outcomes each (R1-O1/O3, R2-
O2/O4), before four Pavlovian stimuli (S1-S4) were trained to predict each outcome. One
outcome that was paired with each instrumental response (O3 and O4) was then devalued, so
that baseline response choice at test would be balanced. Instrumental responding was then
assessed in the presence of each individual Pavlovian stimulus, so that only one outcome was
primed per trial. PIT effects were observed for the valued outcomes, ts > 3.99, ps < .001, but
not for the devalued outcomes, F < 1, BF10 = 0.29. Hence, when baseline response choice
was equated and only one outcome was primed per test trial, PIT was sensitive to outcome
devaluation. The data therefore support goal-directed models of PIT. | en_GB |