Overshadowing of geometry learning by discrete landmarks in the water maze: Effects of relative salience and relative validity of competing cues

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 126-139

  Kosaki, Yutaka ^a,b   Austen, Joe M ^a   McGregor, Anthony ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Associative learning; Cue competition; Geometry; Spatial learning; Water maze

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; ESCAPE BEHAVIOR; LEARNING; MALE; MAZE TEST; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; RAT; REACTION TIME; REPRODUCIBILITY; SPATIAL BEHAVIOR;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMALS; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; CUES; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); ESCAPE REACTION; MALE; MAZE LEARNING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RATS; REACTION TIME; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SET (PSYCHOLOGY); SPACE PERCEPTION; SPATIAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 84881242979     PISSN: 00977403     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0031199     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Cheng, K. (1986). A purely geometric module in the rat's spatial representation. Cognition, 23, 149-178. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(86)90041-7
2. Cheng, K., & Newcombe, N. S. (2005). Is there a geometric module for spatial orientation? Squaring theory and evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1-23. doi:10.3758/BF03196346
3. Doeller, C. F., & Burgess, N. (2008). Distinct error-correcting and incidental learning of location relative to landmarks and boundaries. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 5909-5914. doi:10.1073/pnas.0711433105
4. Doeller, C. F., King, J. A., & Burgess, N. (2008). Parallel striatal and hippocampal systems for landmarks and boundaries in spatial memory. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 5915-5920. doi:10.1073/pnas.0801489105
5. Gallistel, C. R. (1990). The organization of learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. Graham, M., Good, M., McGregor, A., & Pearce, J. M. (2006). 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, 32, 44-59. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.32.1.44
7. Gray, E. R., Blomfield, L. L., Ferrey, A., Spetch, M. L., & Sturdy, C. B. (2005). Spatial encoding in mountain chickadees: Features overshadow geometry. Biology Letters, 1, 314-317. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2005.0347
8. Hayward, A., Good, M., & Pearce, J. M. (2004). Failure of a landmark to restrict spatial learning based on the shape of the environment. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology B: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 57, 289-314. doi:10.1080/02724990344000150
9. Hayward, A., McGregor, A., Good, M. A., & Pearce, J. M. (2003). Absence of overshadowing and blocking between landmarks and the geometric cues provided by the shape of a test arena. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology B: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 56, 114-126. doi:10.1080/02724990244000214
10. Horne, M. R., & Pearce, J. M. (2009). A landmark blocks searching for a hidden platform in an environment with a distinctive shape after extended pretraining. Learning & Behavior, 37, 167-178. doi:10.3758/LB .37.2.167
11. Horne, M. R., & Pearce, J. M. (2011). Potentiation and overshadowing between landmarks and environmental geometric cues. Learning & Behavior, 39, 371-382. doi:10.3758/s13420-011-0032-8
12. Kamin, L. J. (1969). Predictability, surprise, attention, and conditioning. In B. A. Campbell & R. M. Church (Eds.), Punishment and aversive behavior (pp. 279-296). New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
13. Mackintosh, N. J. (1974). The psychology of animal learning. London, UK: Academic Press.
14. Mackintosh, N. J. (1976). Overshadowing and stimulus intensity. Animal Learning & Behavior, 4, 186-192. doi:10.3758/BF03214033
15. March, J., Chamizo, V. D., & Mackintosh, N. J. (1992). Reciprocal overshadowing between intra-maze and extra-maze cues. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology B: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 45, 49-63.
16. McGregor, A., Horne, M. R., Esber, G. R., & Pearce, J. M. (2009). 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, 35, 357-370. doi:10.1037/a0014536
17. Miles, C. G., & Jenkins, H. M. (1973). Overshadowing in operant conditioning as a function of discriminability. Learning and Motivation, 4, 11-27. doi:10.1016/0023-9690(73)90036-2
18. Miller, N. Y., & Shettleworth, S. (2007). Learning about environmental geometry: An associative model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 33, 191-212. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.33.3 .191
19. Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
20. Pearce, J. M. (2009). The 36th Sir Frederick Bartlett lecture: An associative analysis of spatial learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (2006), 62, 1665-1684. doi:10.1080/17470210902805589
21. Pearce, J. M., Graham, M., Good, M. A., Jones, P. M., & McGregor, A. (2006). Potentiation, overshadowing, and blocking of spatial learning based on the shape of the environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 32, 201-214. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.32.3.201
22. Pearce, J. M., Ward-Robinson, J., Good, M., Fussell, C., & Aydin, A. (2001). Influence of a beacon on spatial learning based on the shape of the test environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 27, 329-344. doi:10.1037/0097-7403.27.4.329
23. Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current theory and research (pp. 64-99). New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
24. Rodríguez, C. A., Chamizo, V. D., & Mackintosh, N. J. (2011). Overshadowing and blocking between landmark learning and shape learning: The importance of sex differences. Learning & Behavior, 39, 324-335. doi:10.3758/s13420-011-0027-5
25. Rodríguez, C. A., Torres, A., Mackintosh, N. J., & Chamizo, V. D. (2010). Sex differences in the strategies used by rats to solve a navigation task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 36, 395-401. doi:10.1037/a0017297
26. Tommasi, L., & Polli, C. (2004). Representation of two geometric features of the environment in the domestic chick (Gallus gallus). Animal Cognition, 7, 53-59. doi:10.1007/s10071-003-0182-y
27. 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
28. Wall, P. L., Botly, L. C. P., Black, C. K., & Shettleworth, S. J. (2004). The geometric module in the rat: Independence of shape and feature learning in a food finding task. Learning & Behavior, 32, 289-298. doi:10.3758/BF03196028
29. Wang, R., & Spelke, E. S. (2002). Human spatial representation: Insights from animals. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 376-382. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01961-7
30. Wang, R. F., & Spelke, E. S. (2003). Comparative approaches to human navigation. In K. J. Jeffery (Ed.), The neurobiology of spatial behaviour (pp. 119-143). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198515241.003.0007