Compound-component differentiation as a function of CS-US interval and CS duration in the rabbit’s conditioned nictitating membrane response

Kehoe, E. James; Schreurs, Bernard G.

doi:10.3758/bf03200049

Cited by 27 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 31 publications

(53 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the difference in CS durations may seem of little significance, recent studies with simultaneous compound stimuli have indicated that the engagement of a gestalt-like unique stimulus depends crucially on the duration of the CSs (Kehoe, 1986;Kehoe & Graham, in press;Kehoe & Schreurs, 1986). Specifically, 300-msec CSs only minimally engage a unique stimulus, and the representations of the individual CSs compete with each other for associative strength.…”

Section: Reill-time Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal primacy overrides prior training in serial compound conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Kehoe

Schreurs

Graham

1987

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Reill-time Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal primacy overrides prior training in serial compound conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Kehoe

Schreurs

Graham

1987

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In animal learning, for example, Kehoe (1986;Kehoe & Shereurs, 1986) has shown that mere exposure to a compound stimulus can alter the extent to which that stimulus is processed elementally or configurally. Using a rabbit nictid tating membrane conditioning preparation, Kehoe found that the amount of generalized excitation received by the r elements of the reinforced AB decreased as the number of reinforced compound trials increased.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of pretraining on acquisition of novel configural discriminations in human predictive learning

Mehta

Russell

2009

Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two experiments, participants acquired one of two target configural discriminations (a biconditional or negative patterning discrimination) in a predictive learning task. In Experiment 1, participants were pretrained with either a configural or an elemental discrimination; in Experiment 2, they were pretrained with a configural discrimination, an elemental discrimination, or a control discrimination that was not expected to bias them toward elemental or configural processing. In both experiments, acquisition of the target configural discriminations was faster after configural pretraining than after elemental pretraining. In addition, the negative patterning discrimination was acquired faster than the biconditional discrimination. Finally, the results of Experiment 2 were more consistent with the notion that elemental pretraining hindered acquisition of the target discriminations than with the notion that configural pretraining enhanced their acquisition. Implications of these findings are discussed.

show abstract

“…Bellingham, Gillette-Bellingham, and Kehoe (1985) and Kehoe and Schreurs (1986) demonstrated the positive patterning effect by training rabbits with presentations of a tone and light paired with the US along with an equal number of the nonreinforced presentations of the tone and light individually. The model is able to simulate this result.…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cerebellar Substrates for Error Correction in Motor Conditioning

Gluck

Allen

Myers

et al. 2001

Neurobiology of Learning and Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors evaluate a mapping of Rescorla and Wagner's (1972) behavioral model of classical conditioning onto the cerebellar substrates for motor reflex learning and illustrate how the limitations of the Rescorla-Wagner model are just as useful as its successes for guiding the development of new psychobiological theories of learning. They postulate that the inhibitory pathway that returns conditioned response information from the cerebellar interpositus nucleus back to the inferior olive is the neural basis for the error correction learning proposed by Rescorla and Wagner (Gluck, Myers, & Thompson, 1994;Thompson, 1986). The authors' cerebellar model expects that behavioral processes described by the Rescorla-Wagner model will be localized within the cerebellum and related brain stem structures, whereas behavioral processes beyond the scope of the Rescorla-Wagner model will depend on extracerebellar structures such as the hippocampus and related cortical regions. Simulations presented here support both implications. Several novel implications of the authors' cerebellar error-correcting model are described including a recent empirical study by Kim, Krupa, and Thompson (1998), who verified that suppressing the putative error correction pathway should interfere with the Kamin (1969) blocking effect, a behavioral manifestation of error correction learning. The authors also discuss the model's implications for understanding the limits of cerebellar contributions to associative learning and how this informs our understanding of hippocampal function in conditioning. This leads to a more integrative view of the neural substrates of conditioning in which the authors' realtime circuit-level model of the cerebellum can be viewed as a generalization of the long-term memory module of Gluck and Myers' (1993) trial-level theory of cerebellar-hippocampal interaction in motor conditioning. ᭧

show abstract

Compound-component differentiation as a function of CS-US interval and CS duration in the rabbit’s conditioned nictitating membrane response

Cited by 27 publications

References 31 publications

Temporal primacy overrides prior training in serial compound conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Temporal primacy overrides prior training in serial compound conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Effects of pretraining on acquisition of novel configural discriminations in human predictive learning

Cerebellar Substrates for Error Correction in Motor Conditioning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About