Have you seen the Kolb’s learning styles and the relation with different areas of the brain?

Dear Dr Wang,

to answer your question, I think you will find the following reference very helpful:

McLaren IP, Forrest CL, McLaren RP, Jones FW, Aitken MR, Mackintosh NJ. Associations and propositions: the case for a dual-process account of learning in humans. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2014 Feb;108:185-95. doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2013.09.014. Epub 2013 Oct 2. Review. PubMed PMID: 24096204.

Yours sincerely,

Rainer

Is any of learning processes beyond associative learning?'

I would almost say NO, but with some huge qualifications. STILL: Outside of the innately-guided inceptions of cognitive-developmental stages/levels (which are progressive) (the innate guidance , at least beginning as basic perceptual shifts, this allowing FOR new types of categorization, new learnings -- as the innate guidances are part of this very learning -- and related learnings beyond; and, all this, eventually, FOR significant new understandings), there is "little else" other than associative learning.

For conceptualization of [my] reality, for psychology, and for artificial intelligence, little more than the above and associative learning is involved (and associative learning is the type of learning occurring after/with the "perceptual shifts" too -- so associative learning is an aspect of about everything). The "little more" include: emotional reactions (patterned to TYPES of circumstances, some developing and emerging with cognitive developments) and some even simpler learning phenomenon, like habituation, sensitization. That's all I 'see'.

Read my "A Human Ethogram ..." and my recent BOOK, Collected Essays to understand my system (which I believe to be THE system):

Article A Human Ethogram: Its Scientific Acceptability and Importanc...

Book NOW the nearly complete collection of essays (RIGHT HERE) _B...

P.S. Not understanding the system I describe (or something similar, if there is such a thing) is failure to see behavior (act. behavior patterns) as biological functioning -- and that is not acceptable. [ ON THE OTHER HAND: Seeing things wrongfully involves near-automatic, unthinking acceptance of some cultural (philosophical) beliefs as "assumptions" -- actually pseudo-assumptions since they are without evidence, groundless (baseless, foundation-less), and without justification. Unfortunately this is MORE THAN common, which is why I have produced about 600 pages of writing to show you -- and to put some things right (also presenting the better, more-likely-true and good alternative assumptions, in the process of the explication). ]