The fate of redundant cues during blocking and a simple discrimination

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 167-179

  Pearce, John M ^a   Dopson, Jemma C ^a   Haselgrove, Mark ^b   Esber, Guillem R ^c  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Appetitive conditioning; Blocking; Pigeons; Rats; Redundant cues; Relative validity; Simple discrimination

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL; APPETITE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COLOR VISION; CONDITIONED REFLEX; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FOOD DEPRIVATION; LEARNING; MALE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PIGEONS AND DOVES; RAT; REACTION TIME; REINFORCEMENT;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; APPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; COLOR PERCEPTION; COLUMBIDAE; CONDITIONING, CLASSICAL; CUES; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; EXTINCTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; FOOD DEPRIVATION; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RATS; REACTION TIME;

EID: 84864875485     PISSN: 00977403     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0027662     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Babb, S. J., & Crystal, J. D. (2006). Discrimination of what, when and where is not based on time of day. Learning & Behavior, 34, 124-130. doi:10.3758/BF03193188.
2. Bush, R. R., & Mosteller, F. (1951). A model for stimulus generalization and discrimination. Psychological Review, 58, 413-423. doi:10.1037/h0054576.
3. Bush, R. R., & Mosteller, F. (1955). Stochastic models for learning. New York, NY: Wiley.
4. Clayton, N. S., & Dickinson, A. (1998). Episodic-like memory during cache recovery by scrub jays. Nature, 395, 272-274. doi:10.1038/26216.
5. Denniston, J. C., Savastano, H. I., & Miller, R. R. (2001). The extended comparator hypothesis: Learning by contiguity, responding by relative strength. In R. R. Mowrer & S. B. Klein (Eds.), Handbook of contemporary learning theories (pp. 65-117). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Dopson, J. C., Esber, G. R., & Pearce, J. M. (2010). Differences in the associability of relevant and irrelevant stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 36, 258-267. doi:10.1037/a0016588.
7. Dopson, J. C., Pearce, J. M., & Haselgrove, M. (2009). Failure of retrospective revaluation to influence blocking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 35, 473-484. doi:10.1037/a0014907.
8. Esber, G. R., & Haselgrove, M. (2011). Reconciling the influence of predictiveness and uncertainty on stimulus salience: A model of attention in associative learning. Proceedings of the Royal Society, B, 278, 2553-2561.
9. Esber, G. R., Pearce, J. M., & Haselgrove, M. (2009). Enhancement of responding to A after A+/AX+ training: Challenges for a comparator theory of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 35, 485-497. doi:10.1037/a0014908.
10. Good, M., & Macphail, E. M. (1994). Hippocampal lesions in pigeons (Columba livia) disrupt reinforced preexposure but not overshadowing or blocking. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology B: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 47, 263-291.
11. Hebb, D. O. (1949). The organization of behavior. New York, NY: Wiley.
12. Heinemann, E., & Chase, S. (1990). A quantitative model for pattern recognition. In M. L. Commons & R. J. Herrnstein (Eds.), Computational and clinical approaches to pattern recognition and concept formation (Vol. 9, pp. 109-226). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Kamin, L. J. (1969). Selective association and conditioning. In N. J. Mackintosh & W. K. Honig (Eds.), Fundamental Issues in Associative Learning (pp. 42-64). Halifax, Canada: Dalhousie University Press.
14. LePelley, M. E. (2004). The role of associative history in models of associative learning: A selective review and a hybrid model. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57B, 192-243.
15. Lovejoy, E. (1966). Analysis of the overlearning reversal effect. Psychological Review, 73, 87-103. doi:10.1037/h0022687.
16. Mackintosh, N. J. (1975a). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276-298. doi:10.1037/h0076778.
17. Mackintosh, N. J. (1975b). Blocking of conditioned suppression: Role of the first compound trial. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1, 335-345. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.1.4.335.
18. Pearce, J. M., Esber, G. R., George, D. N., & Haselgrove, M. (2008). The nature of discrimination learning in pigeons. Learning & Behavior, 36, 188-199. doi:10.3758/LB.36.3.188.
19. Pearce, J. M., & Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian learning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not unconditioned stimuli. Psychological Review, 87, 532-552. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.87.6.532.
20. Pearce, J. M., & Mackintosh, N. J. (2010). Two theories of attention: A review and a possible integration. In C. J. Mitchell & M. E. Le Pelley (Eds.), Attention and associative learning: From brain to behaviour (pp. 11-39). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
21. Pearce, J. M., & Redhead, E. S. (1995). Supernormal conditioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 21, 155-165. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.21.2.155.
22. Pearce, J. M. (1987). A model of stimulus generalization for Pavlovian conditioning. Psychological Review, 94, 61-73. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.1.61.
23. Pearce, J. M. (1994). Similarity and discrimination: A selective review and a connectionist model. Psychological Review, 101, 587-607. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.587.
24. Rescorla, R. A., & Durlach, P. (1981). Within-event learning in Pavlovian conditioning. In N. E. Spear & R. R. Miller (Eds.), Information processing in animals: Memory mechanisms (pp. 81-111). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25. Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory (pp. 64-99). New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
26. Rescorla, R. A. (1969). Pavlovian conditioned inhibition. Psychological Bulletin, 72, 77-94. doi:10.1037/h0027760.
27. Rescorla, R. A. (2002). Comparison of the rates of associative change during acquisition and extinction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 28, 406-415. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.28.4.406.
28. Schreurs, B. G., & Westbrook, R. F. (1982). The effects of changes in the CS-US interval during compound conditioning upon an otherwise blocked element. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology B, 34, 19-30.
29. Spence, K. W. (1940). Continuous versus non-continuous interpretations of discrimination learning. Psychological Review, 47, 271-288. doi: 10.1037/h0054336.
30. Stout, S. C., & Miller, R. R. (2007). Sometimes-competing retrieval (SOCR): A formalization of the comparator hypothesis. Psychological Review, 114, 759-783. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.3.759.
31. Sutherland, N. S., & Mackintosh, N. J. (1971). Mechanisms of animal discrimination learning. New York, NY: Academic Press.
32. Wagner, A. R., Logan, F. A., Haberlandt, K., & Price, T. (1968). Stimulus selection in animal discrimination learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 76, 171-180. doi:10.1037/h0025414.
33. Wagner, A. R. (1969). Stimulus validity and stimulus selection in associative learning. In N. J. Mackintosh & W. K. Honig (Eds.), Fundamental issues in associative learning (pp. 90-122). Halifax, Canada: Dalhousie University Press.