Associative mediational processes in the acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 467-482

  Delamater, Andrew R ^a  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; CONDITIONED REFLEX; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; HEARING; LEARNING; MALE; MOTIVATION; RAT; SPRAGUE DAWLEY RAT; VISION;

ANIMALS; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; ATTENTION; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; CONDITIONING, CLASSICAL; CUES; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; MALE; MOTIVATION; RATS; RATS, SPRAGUE-DAWLEY; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0032185151     PISSN: 00977403     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0097-7403.24.4.467     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Bonardi, C., & Hall, G. (1994). Occasion-setting renders stimuli more similar: Acquired equivalence between the targets of feature-positive discriminations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47B, 63-81.
2. Bonardi, C., Rey, V., Richmond, M., & Hall, G. (1993). Acquired equivalence of cues in pigeon autoshaping: Effects of training with common consequences and with common antecedents. Animal Learning & Behavior, 21, 369-376.
3. Delamater, A. R. (1995). Outcome-selective effects of intertrial reinforcement in a Pavlovian appetitive conditioning paradigm with rats. Animal Learning & Behavior, 23, 31-39.
4. Delamater, A. R. (1996). Effects of several extinction treatments upon the integrity of Pavlovian stimulus-outcome associations. Animal Learning & Behavior, 24, 437-449.
5. Delamater, A. R. (1997). Selective reinstatement of stimulus-outcome associations. Animal Learning & Behavior, 25, 400-412.
6. Gibson, J. J., & Gibson, E. J. (1955). Perceptual learning: Differentiation or enrichment? Psychological Review, 62, 32-41.
7. Gluck, M. A., & Myers, C. E. (1993). Hippocampal mediation of stimulus representation: A computational theory. Hippocampus, 3, 491-516.
8. Gluck, M. A., & Myers, C. E. (1997). Psychobiological models of hippocampal function in learning and memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 481-514.
9. Grant, D. S., & Spetch, M. L. (1993). Analogical and nonanalogical coding of samples differing in duration in a choice-matching task in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 19, 15-25.
10. Hall, G. (1991). Perceptual and associative learning. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
11. Hall, G. (1996). Learning about associatively activated stimulus representations: Implications for acquired equivalence and perceptual learning. Animal Learning & Behavior, 24, 233-255.
12. Hall, G., Ray, E., & Bonardi, C. (1993). Acquired equivalence between cues trained with a common antecedent. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 19, 391-399.
13. Honey, R. C., & Hall, G. (1989). The acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 15, 338-346.
14. Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior: An introduction to behavior theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
15. Johns, K. W., & Williams, D. A. (1998). Acquired equivalence learning with antecedent and consequent unconditioned stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 24, 3-14.
16. Kaiser, D. H., Sherburne, L. M., Steirn, J. N., & Zentall, T. R. (1997). Perceptual learning in pigeons: Decreased ability to discriminate samples mapped onto the same comparison in many-to-one matching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 378-381.
17. Kehoe, E. J. (1988). A layered network model of associative learning: Learning to learn and configuration. Psychological Review, 95, 411-433.
18. Kirk, R. E. (1968). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
19. Konorski, J. (1967). Integrative activity of the brain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Lawrence, D. H. (1949). Acquired distinctiveness of cues: I. Transfer between discriminations on the basis of familiarity with the stimulus. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39, 770-784.
21. Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variation in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276-298.
22. Maki, W. S. (1993). From elementary associations to animal cognition: Connectionist models of discrimination learning. In T. R. Zentall (Ed.), Animal cognition: A tribute to Donald A. Riley (pp. 293-312). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Maki, W. S., & Abunawass, A. M. (1991). A connectionist approach to conditional discriminations: Learning, short-term memory, and attention. In M. L. Commons, S. Grossberg, & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.), Neural network models of conditioning and action (pp. 241-278). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Miller, N. E., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social learning and imitation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25. Pearce, J. M. (1987). A model for stimulus generalization in Pavlovian conditioning. Psychological Review, 94, 61-73.
26. Rodger, R. S. (1974). Multiple contrasts, factors, error rate, and power. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 27, 179-198.
27. Rodger, R. S. (1975). The number of non-zero, post hoc contrasts from ANOVA and error-rate. I. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 28, 71-78.
28. Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., & Williams, R. J. (1986). Learning internal representations by error propagation. In D. E. Rumelhart, J. L. McClelland, & the PDP Research Group (Eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Vol. 1: Foundations (pp. 318-362). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Schmajuk, N., & DiCarlo, J. (1992). Stimulus configuration, classical conditioning, and hippocampal function. Psychological Review, 99, 268-305.
30. Sidman, M., & Tailby, W. (1982). Conditional discrimination vs. matching to sample: An expansion of the testing paradigm. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 5-22.
31. Urcuioli, P. J., Zentall, T. R., & DeMarse, T. (1995). Transfer to derived sample-comparison relations by pigeons following many-to-one versus one-to-many matching with identical training relations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (B): Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 48B, 158-178.
32. Vaughan, W., Jr. (1988). Formation of equivalence sets in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 14, 36-42.
33. Wasserman, E. A. (1994). A behavioral analysis of concepts: Its application to pigeons and children. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 31, 73-132.
34. Watt, A., & Honey, R. C. (1997). Combining CSs associated with the same or different USs. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (B): Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 50B, 350-367.
35. Zentall, T. R., Sherburne, L. M., & Steirn, J. N. (1993). Common coding and stimulus class formation in pigeons. In T. R. Zentall (Ed.), Animal cognition: A tribute to Donald A. Riley (pp. 217-236). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.