Blocking and Overshadowing between Intra-Maze and Extra-Maze Cues: A Test of the Independence of Locale and Guidance Learning

Chamizo, Victoria D.; Sterio, D.; Mackintosh, N. J.

doi:10.1080/14640748508402098

Cited by 112 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With repeated training, the mice learned that the polystyrene cone was the only cue that reliably predicted the escape hole location, and performance improved. Similar learning impairments resulting from a bias toward distal spatial cues over proximal cues have been reported on other tasks, such as the eight-arm radial maze, Morris water maze, and a food-finding task in a large arena (Kraemer et al 1983;Chamizo et al 1985;March et al 1992;McDonald and White 1994;Gibson and Shettleworth 2003). A potential problem with this interpretation is that one would predict more rapid learning in the CVC group, given the absence of distal room cues and the apparent increased salience of the discrete proximal cue.…”

Section: Org Downloaded Frommentioning

confidence: 70%

Spatial and nonspatial escape strategies in the Barnes maze

Harrison¹,

Reiserer²,

Tomarken³

et al. 2006

Learn. Mem.

194

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Barnes maze is a spatial memory task that requires subjects to learn the position of a hole that can be used to escape the brightly lit, open surface of the maze. Two experiments assessed the relative importance of spatial (extra-maze) versus proximal visible cues in solving the maze. In Experiment 1, four groups of mice were trained either with or without a discrete visible cue marking the location of the escape hole, which was either in a fixed or variable location across trials. In Experiment 2, all mice were trained with the discrete visible cue marking the target hole location. Two groups were identical to the cued-target groups from Experiment 1, with either fixed or variable escape locations. For these mice, the discrete cue either was the sole predictor of the target location or was perfectly confounded with the spatial extra-maze cues. The third group also used a cued variable target, but a curtain was drawn around the maze to prevent the use of spatial cues to guide navigation. Probe trials with all escape holes blocked were conducted to dissociate the use of spatial and discrete proximal cues. We conclude that the Barnes maze can be solved efficiently using spatial, visual cue, or serial-search strategies. However, mice showed a strong preference for using the distal room cues, even when a discrete visible cue clearly marked the escape location. Importantly, these data show that the cued-target control version of the Barnes maze as typically conducted does not dissociate spatial from nonspatial abilities.

show abstract

Section: Org Downloaded Frommentioning

confidence: 70%

Spatial and nonspatial escape strategies in the Barnes maze

Harrison¹,

Reiserer²,

Tomarken³

et al. 2006

Learn. Mem.

194

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There has already been a fair amount of research demonstrating cue-competition effects, such as overshadowing (e.g., Cheng et al 1987;Cheng 1989;March et al 1992;Spetch 1995;Roberts and Pearce 1999;Sanchez-Moreno et al 1999) and blocking (Diez-Chamizo et al 1985;Rodrigo et al 1997), in the spatial domain (see reviews by Chamizo 2002Chamizo , 2003. Other well-established associative phenomena, such as generalization and peakshift, have been shown in the spatial domain as well (see review by Cheng and Spetch 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integration of spatial maps in pigeons

Blaisdell

Cook

2004

Anim Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The integration of spatial maps in pigeons was investigated using a spatial analog to sensory preconditioning. The pigeons were tested in an open-field arena in which they had to locate hidden food among a 4×4 grid of gravel-filled cups. In phase 1, the pigeons were exposed to a consistent spatial relationship (vector) between landmark L (a red L-shaped block of wood), landmark T (a blue Tshaped block of wood) and the hidden food goal. In phase 2, the pigeons were then exposed to landmark T with a different spatial vector to the hidden food goal. Following phase 2, pigeons were tested with trials on which they were presented with only landmark L to examine the potential integration of the phase 1 and 2 vectors via their shared common elements. When these test trials were preceded by phase 1 and phase 2 reminder trials, pigeons searched for the goal most often at a location consistent with their integration of the L→T phase 1 and T→phase 2 goal vectors. This result indicates that integration of spatial vectors acquired during phases 1 and 2 allowed the pigeons to compute a novel L→goal vector. This suggests that spatial maps may be enlarged by successively integrating additional spatial information through the linkage of common elements.

show abstract

“…The failure to find evidence for overshadowing or cue facilitation is of particular interest, given the suggestions that cues incorporated into a rich spatial representation (cognitive map) would not be expected to show the cue competition effects found in most learning paradigms (Biegler & Morris, 1999;Diez-Chamizo et al, 1985;Pearce et al, 2001). Diez-Chamizo et al argued that cue competition effects would not be expected when the two cues involved are used by two different learning systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No evidence for overshadowing or facilitation of spatial pattern learning by visual cues

Brown

Yang

DiGian

2002

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments were conducted to examine the effects of redundant and relevant visual cues on spatial pattern learning. Rats searched for hidden food items on the tops of poles that formed a square (Experiment 1) or a checkerboard (Experiment 2) pattern. The experimental groups were trained with visual cues that specified the locations of the baited poles. All groups were tested without visual cues so that any overshadowing or facilitation of spatial pattern learning by visual cues could be detected. Spatial choices were controlled by the spatial pattern and by the visual cues in both experiments. However, there was no evidence of overshadowing or facilitation of spatial pattern learning by visual cues in either experiment. The results are consistent with the idea that the representation of the spatial pattern that guides choices is not controlled by the same learning processes as those that produce associations between visual cues and food locations.

show abstract

Blocking and Overshadowing between Intra-Maze and Extra-Maze Cues: A Test of the Independence of Locale and Guidance Learning

Cited by 112 publications

References 9 publications

Spatial and nonspatial escape strategies in the Barnes maze

Spatial and nonspatial escape strategies in the Barnes maze

Integration of spatial maps in pigeons

No evidence for overshadowing or facilitation of spatial pattern learning by visual cues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About