Application of Associative Learning Paradigms to

Application of associative learning paradigms to clinically relevant individual differences in cognitive processing. Individual differences in cognitive processing have been implicated in a range of clinical capitalize on the wealth of theories, measurement strategies, and analytical approaches developed by quantitative cognitive scientists, even though these models and methods seem promising for the advancement of cognitive theories of psychopathology (Treat, McFall, Viken, Kruschke, Nosofsky, & Wang, 2007). Cognitive scientists also have been slow to evaluate the generalizability of their models and methods to the more complex circumstances characteristic of " real-world " processing. The limited exploration of the integrative area of quantitative clinical-cognitive science reflects, in part, two fundamental differences between cognitive and clinical science. First, quantitative cognitive scientists typically focus on the development and evaluation of formal mathematical models of the normative operation of component cognitive processes, such as attention, memory, and learning. Clinical scientists, in contrast, often study individual differences in abnormal processing. Second, quantitative cognitive scientists commonly study processing of simple, artificial stimuli that vary along readily identifiable dimensions, that are perceived similarly across persons, and with which persons frequently have limited experience. In contrast, clinical scientists more frequently study individual differences in processing of more complex, socially and emotionally relevant stimuli that vary along numerous dimensions, that may be perceived quite differently across persons, and with which persons often have prior experience. Thus, the application of cognitive science methods to clinical problems necessitates addressing the representation and assessment of individual differences, as well as far greater stimulus complexity. p. 3 This chapter provides an overview of our efforts to draw on contemporary cognitive science to examine clinically relevant individual differences in category learning with complex, socially relevant stimuli. Cognitive scientists long have recognized the fundamental importance of category learning as a core cognitive process (see Ashby & Maddox, 2005, or Kruschke, 2005a, for reviews). Clinical researchers tend to focus on static characterizations of cognitive processing, but examination of the way in which processing changes through time could be quite fruitful, whether the variation occurs naturally over different time scales, in response to feedback, or as a function of a theoretically relevant manipulation that is associated with exacerbation or amelioration of the clinical phenomenon. We focus in this chapter on learning as a function of feedback, because socially relevant learning processes presumably influence the development, maintenance, and modification of our interpersonal beliefs and behaviors. Moreover, the provision of …