Directed forgetting and working-memory load reduce outcome-selective Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer in humans
Abstract
In outcome-selective Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT), reward-related cues selectively energize instrumental responding for associated outcomes. In humans, this effect has been attributed both to automatic associative processes and to cognitive inferences about which rewards are available in the presence of a cue. The present research examined whether outcome-selective PIT is influenced by manipulations that discourage such inferences. Across three experiments using a stock-market scenario with monetary rewards, participants learned Pavlovian cue–outcome relations and instrumental response–outcome contingencies before a transfer test. Experiment 1 established an outcome-selective PIT effect, which was substantially larger among participants reporting strategic use of the cues. Experiment 2 showed that instructing participants to forget the Pavlovian relations after an ostensible software error significantly reduced this effect. Experiment 3 showed that a concurrent working-memory load during the transfer test also attenuated PIT. However, a small effect persisted under the combined manipulations. Together, these findings indicate that outcome-selective PIT is modulated by cognitive reward expectancies and by beliefs about cue relevance. The residual transfer is not readily explained by experimenter demand, which here worked against cue-based responding. Cue reactivity therefore appears to rest on reward expectations that persist even when they are false and have been explicitly disavowed.
Related
- GamPIT: Examining the Influence of Gambling-Related Cues on Instrumental Behaviour Using Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer
- Enhanced Alcohol-Specific but not General Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer in Alcohol Use Disorder
- Reduced Control Over Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer in Human Addiction: A Systematic Investigation Across Alcohol Use Disorder and Smoking Status
- Age-related decline in directed forgetting: a meta-analytic test of inhibition versus cognitive load accounts.
- Instrumental-Motor Transfer: The Relative Value of Competing Movement Goals Modulates Implicit Motor Learning
BibTeX
@article{huseynzade2026directed,
title = {{Directed forgetting and working-memory load reduce outcome-selective Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer in humans}},
author = {Ulkar Huseynzade and David Dignath and Andreas B. Eder},
journal = {Scientific Reports},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1038/s41598-026-75419-x},
url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-026-75419-x},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Directed forgetting and working-memory load reduce outcome-selective Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer in humans
AU - Ulkar Huseynzade
AU - David Dignath
AU - Andreas B. Eder
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/13
JO - Scientific Reports
DO - 10.1038/s41598-026-75419-x
UR - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-026-75419-x
AB - In outcome-selective Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT), reward-related cues selectively energize instrumental responding for associated outcomes. In humans, this effect has been attributed both to automatic associative processes and to cognitive inferences about which rewards are available in the presence of a cue. The present research examined whether outcome-selective PIT is influenced by manipulations that discourage such inferences. Across three experiments using a stock-market scenario with monetary rewards, participants learned Pavlovian cue–outcome relations and instrumental response–outcome contingencies before a transfer test. Experiment 1 established an outcome-selective PIT effect, which was substantially larger among participants reporting strategic use of the cues. Experiment 2 showed that instructing participants to forget the Pavlovian relations after an ostensible software error significantly reduced this effect. Experiment 3 showed that a concurrent working-memory load during the transfer test also attenuated PIT. However, a small effect persisted under the combined manipulations. Together, these findings indicate that outcome-selective PIT is modulated by cognitive reward expectancies and by beliefs about cue relevance. The residual transfer is not readily explained by experimenter demand, which here worked against cue-based responding. Cue reactivity therefore appears to rest on reward expectations that persist even when they are false and have been explicitly disavowed.
SN - 2045-2322
ER -