Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues: II. Neural manipulations and their implications

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 388-396

  Coutureau, E ^a,b   Killcross, A S ^a,b   Good, M ^a,b   Marshall, V J ^a,b   Ward Robinson, Jasper ^a,b   Honey, R C ^a,b  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONDITIONED REFLEX; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; ENTORHINAL CORTEX; HIPPOCAMPUS; INJURY; INSTRUMENTAL CONDITIONING; LEARNING; MALE; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; RAT; TEMPERATURE SENSE; VISION;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; CONDITIONING, CLASSICAL; CONDITIONING, OPERANT; CUES; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; ENTORHINAL CORTEX; GENERALIZATION, STIMULUS; HIPPOCAMPUS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RATS; TEMPERATURE SENSE; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0036781154     PISSN: 00977403     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0097-7403.28.4.388     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Bateson, P. P. G., & Chantrey, D. F. (1972). Retardation of discrimination learning in monkeys and chicks previously exposed to both stimuli. Nature, 202, 421-422.
2. Brandon, S. E., Vogel, E. H., & Wagner, A. R. (2000). A componential view of configural cues in generalization and discrimination in Pavlovian conditioning. Behavioural Brain Research, 110, 67-72.
3. Brogden, W. J. (1939). Sensory pre-conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25, 323-332.
4. Coutureau, E., Galani, R., Gosselin, O., Majchrzak, M., & Di Scala, G. (1999). Entorhinal but not hippocampal or subicular lesions disrupt latent inhibition in rats. Neuroblology of Learning Memory, 72, 143-157.
5. Delamater, A. R. (1998). Associative mediational processes in the acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 24, 467-482.
6. Delamater, A. R., & Joseph, P. (2000). Common coding in symbolic matching tasks in humans: Training with a common consequence or antecedent. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53B, 255-273.
7. Estes, E. K. (1950). Toward a statistical theory of learning. Psychological Review, 57, 94-107.
8. Gibson, E. I., & Walk, R. D. (1956). The effect of prolonged exposure to visually presented patterns on learning to discriminate them. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 49, 239-242.
9. Gluck, M. A., & Myers, C. E. (1993). Hippocampal mediation of stimulus representation: A computational theory. Hippocampus, 3, 491-516.
10. Goldstone, R. L. (1998). Perceptual learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 585-610.
11. Good, M., DeHoz, L., & Morris, R. G. M. (1998). Contingent versus incidental context processing during conditioning: Dissociation after excitotoxic hippocampal plus dentate gyrus lesions. Hippocampus, 8, 147-159.
12. Good, M., & Honey, R. C. (1997). Dissociable effects of selective lesions to hippocampal sub-systems on exploratory behavior, contextual learning and spatial learning. Behavioral Neuroscience, 111, 487-493.
13. Hall, G. (1991). Perceptual and associative learning. Oxford, England: Clarendon.
14. Honey, R. C. (1990). Stimulus generalization as a function of stimulus novelty and familiarity in rats. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 178-184.
15. Honey, R. C. (2000). The Experimental Psychology Society Prize Lecture: Associative priming in Pavlovian conditioning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53B, 1-23.
16. Honey, R. C., Bateson, P., & Horn, G. (1994). The role of stimulus comparison in perceptual learning: An investigation with the domestic chick. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47B, 83-103.
17. Honey, R. C., & Good, M. (2000). Associative modulation of the orienting response: Distinct effects revealed by hippocampal lesions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 26, 3-14.
18. Honey, R. C., & Hall, G. (1989a). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 178-184.
19. Honey, R. C., & Hall, G. (1989b). Enhanced discriminability and reduced associability following flavor preexposure. Learning and Motivation, 20, 262-277.
20. Honey, R. C., & Hall, G. (1991). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues using a sensory-preconditioning procedure. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43B, 121-135.
21. Honey, R. C., & Ward-Robinson, J. (2001). Transfer between contextual conditional discriminations: An examination of how stimulus conjunctions are represented. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 27, 196-205.
22. Honey, R. C., & Ward-Robinson, J. (2002). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues: I. Exploring a neural network approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 28, 378-387.
23. Honey, R. C., & Watt, A. (1998). Acquired relational equivalence: Implications for the nature of associative structures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 24, 325-334.
24. Honey, R. C., & Watt, A. (1999). Acquired relational equivalence between contexts and features. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 25, 324-333.
25. Honey, R. C., Watt, A., & Good, M. (1998). Hippocampal lesions disrupt an associative mismatch process. Journal of Neuroscience, 18, 2226-2230.
26. Hull, C. L. (1939). The problem of stimulus equivalence in behavior theory. Psychological Review, 46, 9-30.
27. James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Holt.
28. 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.
29. Mackintosh, N. J. (1974). The psychology of animal learning. London: Academic Press.
30. 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.
31. 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.
32. McLaren, I. P. L., Kaye, H., & Mackintosh, N. J. (1989). An associative theory of the representation of stimuli: Applications to perceptual learning and latent inhibition. In R. G. M. Morris (Ed.), Parallel distributed processing: Implications for psychology and neurobiology (pp. 102-130). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
33. Miller, N. E. (1948). Theory and experiment relating psychoanalytic displacements to stimulus-response generalization. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 43, 155-178.
34. Miller, N. E., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social learning and imitation. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner.
35. Morris, R. G. M., Schenk, F., Tweedie, F., & Jarrard, L. E. (1990). Ibotenate lesions of the hippocampus and/or subiculum: Dissociating components of allocentric spatial learning. European Journal of Neuroscience. 2, 1016-1028.
36. Myers, C. E., Gluck, M. A., & Granger, R. (1995). Dissociation of hippocampal and entorhinal function in associative learning: A computational approach. Psychobiology, 23, 116-138.
37. Oswald, C. P. J., Yee, B. K., Rawlins, J. N. P., Bannerman, D. B., Good, M., & Honey, R. C. (2001). Involvement of the entorhinal cortex in a process of attentional modulation: Evidence from a novel variant of an IDS/EDS procedure. Behavioral Neuroscience, 115, 841-849.
38. Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford University Press.
39. Paxinos, G., & Watson, C. (1998). The rat brain in stereotaxic coordinates. London: Academic Press.
40. Pearce, J. M. (1994). Similarity and discrimination: A selective review and a connectionist model. Psychological Review, 101, 587-607.
41. Port, R. L., Beggs, A. L., & Patterson, M. M. (1987). Hippocampal substrates of sensory associations. Physiology and Behavior, 39, 643-647.
42. Port, R. L., & Patterson, M. M. (1984). Fimbrial lesions and sensory preconditioning. Behavioral Neuroscience, 98, 584-589.
43. Rescorla, R. A. (1972). "Configural" conditioning in discrete-trial bar pressing. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 79, 307-317.
44. Rescorla, R. A. (1976). Stimulus generalization: Some predictions from a model of Pavlovian conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 2, 88-96.
45. Rescorla, R. A., & Cunningham, C. L. (1978). Within-compound flavor associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 4, 267-275.
46. Rudy, J. W., & Sutherland, R. J. (1995). Configural association theory and the hippocampal formation: An appraisal and reconfiguration. Hippocampus, 5, 375-389.
47. Saavedra, M. A. (1975). Pavlovian compound conditioning in the rabbit. Learning and Motivation, 6, 314-326.
48. Schmajuk, N. A., & Blair, H. T. (1993). Stimulus configuration, spatial learning and hippocampal function. Behavioral Brain Research, 59, 103-117.
49. Wagner, A. R. (1981). SOP: A model of automatic memory processing in animal behavior. In N. E. Spear & R. R. Miller (Eds.), Information processing in animals: Memory mechanisms (pp. 5-48). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
50. Wagner, A. R., & Rescorla, R. A. (1972). Inhibition in Pavlovian conditioning: Application of a theory. In R. A. Boakes & M. S. Halliday (Eds.), Inhibition and learning (pp. 301-336). London: Academic Press.
51. Ward-Robinson, J., Coutureau, E., Good, M., Honey, R. C., Killcross, A. S., & Oswald, C. J. P. (2001). Excitotoxic lesions of the hippocampus leave sensory preconditioning intact. Implications for models of hippocampal function. Behavioral Neuroscience, 115, 1357-1362.
52. Ward-Robinson, J., & Honey, R. C. (2000). A novel contextual dimension for use with an operant chamber: From simple to hierarchical forms of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 26, 358-363.