Conditioned inhibition and superconditioning in an environment with a distinctive shape

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 381-394

  Horne, Murray R ^a   Pearce, John M ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Conditioned inhibition; Geometric module; Spatial learning; Superconditioning

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; CONDITIONING; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENT; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; RAT;

ANIMALS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONDITIONING (PSYCHOLOGY); DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); ENVIRONMENT; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; RATS; SPATIAL BEHAVIOR;

RATTUS;

EID: 77955322018     PISSN: 00977403     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0017837     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Amsel A. Frustration theory: An analysis of dispositional learning and memory 1992, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
2. Amsel A., Roussel J. Motivational properties of frustration: I. Effect on a running response of the addition of frustration to the motivational complex. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1952, 43:363-368.
3. Cheng K. A purely geometric module in the rats spatial representation. Cognition 1986, 23:149-178.
4. Cheng K., Newcombe N.S. Is there a geometric module for spatial orientation? Squaring theory and evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2005, 12:1-23.
5. Dawson M.R.W., Kelly D.M., Spetch M.L., Dupuis B. Learning about environmental geometry: A flaw in Miller and Shettleworth's (2007) operant model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2008, 34:415-418.
6. Doeller C.F., Burgess N. Distinct error-correcting and incidental learning of location relative to landmarks and boundaries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 2008, 105:5909-5914.
7. Doeller C.F., King J.A., Burgess N. Parallel striatal and hippocampal systems for landmarks and boundaries in spatial memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 2008, 105:5915-5920.
8. Gallistel C.R. The Organization of learning 1990, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
9. Graham M., Good M.A., McGregor A., Pearce J.M. Spatial learning based on the shape of the environment is influenced by properties of the objects forming the shape. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2006, 32:44-59.
10. Gray E.R., Bloomfield L.L., Ferrey A., Spetch M.L., Sturdy C.B. Spatial encoding in mountain chickadees: Features overshadow geometry. Biology Letters 2005, 1:314-317.
11. Hayward A., Good M.A., Pearce J.M. Failure of a landmark to restrict spatial learning based on the shape of the environment. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2004, 57B:289-314.
12. Hayward A., McGregor A., Good M.A., Pearce J.M. Absence of overshadowing and blocking between landmarks and the geometric cues provided by the shape of the test arena. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2003, 56B:114-126.
13. Horne M.R., Pearce J.M. A landmark blocks searching for a hidden platform in an environment with a distinctive shape after extended pretraining. Learning and Behavior 2009, 37:167-178.
14. Horne M.R., Pearce J.M. Between-cue associations influence searching for a hidden goal in an environment with a distinctive shape. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2009, 35:99-107.
15. Kamin L.J. Predictability, surprise attention, and conditioning. Punishment and aversive behavior 1969, 279-296. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. B.A. Campbell, R.M. Church (Eds.).
16. McGregor A., Horne M.R., Esber G.R., Pearce J.M. Absence of overshadowing between a landmark and geometric cues in a distinctively shaped environment: A test of Miller and Shettleworth (2007). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2009, 34:357-370.
17. Miller N.Y., Shettleworth S.J. Learning about environmental geometry: An associative model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2007, 33:191-212.
18. Miller N.Y., Shettleworth S.J. An associative model of geometry learning: A modified choice rule. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2008, 34:419-422.
19. Morris R.G.M., Spooner R.I.W. Watermaze software (computer software) 1990, Watermaze Software, Edinburgh, UK.
20. Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes (G. V. Anrep, Trans.). London: Oxford University Press.
21. Pearce J.M. Similarity and discrimination: A selective review and a connectionist model. Psychological Review 1994, 101:587-607.
22. Pearce J.M., Good M.A., Jones P.M., McGregor A. Transfer of spatial behavior between different environments: Implications for theories of spatial learning and for the role of the hippocampus in spatial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2004, 30:135-147.
23. Pearce J.M., Graham M., Good M.A., Jones P.M., McGregor A. Potentiation, overshadowing, and blocking of spatial learning based on the shape of the environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2006, 32:201-214.
24. Pearce J.M., Redhead E.S. Supernormal conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 1995, 21:155-165.
25. Pearce J.M., Ward-Robinson J., Good M., Fussell C., Aydin A. Influence of a beacon on spatial learning based on the shape of the test environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2001, 27:329-344.
26. Rescorla R.A. Pavlovian conditioned inhibition. Psychological Bulletin 1969, 72:77-94.
27. Rescorla R.A. Variation in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement following prior inhibitory conditioning. Learning and Motivation 1971, 2:113-123.
28. Rescorla R.A., Wagner A.R. A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory 1972, 64-99. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. A.H. Black, W.F. Prokasy (Eds.).
29. Sansa J., Rodrigo T., Santamaría J., Manteigia R.D., Chamizo V.D. Conditioned inhibition in the spatial domain. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2009, 35:566-577.
30. Wagner A.R. Elementary associations. Essays in neobehaviorism 1971, 187-213. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. H.H. Kendler, J.T. Spence (Eds.).
31. Wall P.L., Botly L.C.P., Black C.K., Shettleworth S.J. The geometric module in the rat: Independence of shape and feature learning in a food finding task. Learning & Behavior 2004, 32:289-298.
32. Wang R.F., Spelke E.S. Human spatial representation: Insights from animals. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2002, 6:376-382.
33. Wang R.F., Spelke E.S. Comparative approaches to human navigation. The Neurobiology of Spatial Behavior 2003, Oxford University Press. K. Jeffrey (Ed.).
34. Wilson P.N., Alexander T. Blocking of spatial learning between enclosure geometry and a local landmark. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2008, 34:1369-1376.