Developmental Processes in Discrimination Learning

Kendler, Howard H.; Kendler, Tracy S.

doi:10.1159/000270883

Cited by 27 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A dual basis for discrimination learning in children has been suggested before. These findings are strongly reminiscent of the extensive body of research comparing reversal and extra-dimensional shift performances (Kendler & Kendler, 1970;Lowenkron, 1969;Wolff, 1967). Those data, acquired from a developmental viewpoint, showed that children about the age of the present subjects generally tend to learn simple discriminations, involving multidimensional stimuli, in an unmediated singleunit fashion.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Joint Control and the Selection of Stimuli from Their Description

Lowenkron

2006

Analysis Verbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examined the role the two constituents of joint control, the tact and the echoic, play in producing accurate selections of novel stimuli in response to their spoken descriptions. Experiment 1 examined the role of tacts. In response to unfamiliar spoken descriptions, children learned to select from among six successively presented comparisons which varied in their color, shape, and border features. Repeated testing and training revealed that accurate selecting with new combinations of the same colors, shapes and borders, did not occur until after the children could themselves tact the individual color, shape and border features with the unfamiliar descriptions. Experiment 2 examined the role of self-echoics. Here, the stimulus features were given their familiar names, but the rehearsal of these names, while searching among the six successively presented comparisons, was impeded by a distracter task. Under these conditions selection of the correct comparison was found to depend on its position in the order of presentation. Correct comparisons presented earlier in the order, and presumably less effected by the distracter task, were more likely to be selected than correct comparisons presented later in the serial order. Taken together, these data suggest that generalized stimulus selection must be under joint tact/echoic control. The data also illustrate the distinction between mediated selection of a stimulus in response to its description (i.e., selection under joint control) and the traditional conception of an unmediated selection response evoked as a result of a heightened response probability in a conditional discrimination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Joint Control and the Selection of Stimuli from Their Description

Lowenkron

2006

Analysis Verbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6-1). Formal theories of discrimination learning are concerned with the details of several effects that Sutherland (1964) related to his two-stage model: the transfer of discrimination training along a dimension (Sutherland, Mackintosh & Mackintosh, 1965); the reversal shift effect (Kendler & Kendler, 1962; and the overtraining reversal effect (Lovejoy, 1966(Lovejoy, , 1968Mackintosh, 1964Mackintosh, , 1965Wolford & Bower, 1969).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Attention and Effort

Egeth¹,

Kahneman²

1975

The American Journal of Psychology

1,739

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. This content downloaded from 146.201.208.22 on Thu, 01 Oct 2015 23:32:09 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BOOK REVIEWS BOOK REVIEWSprovides a brief overview of the symposium and makes the telling point that one "cannot get a machine to do anything very intelligent unless it does understand the knowledge appropriate to its domain. Machine intelligence is machine understanding." A few final, general comments about this volume appear in order. First, the degree to which the book contains contributions that all approach 'cognition,' 'understanding,' and so on, in terms of information processing or computer science greatly enhances its overall impact. It is not uncommon to see a published symposium that is spread too thin and attempts a too great a diversity of orientation among its participants. Happily, this fault is not true of the present book. Second, with few minor exceptions, the papers are very clearly written and represent an excellent cross section of current attempts to model complex problem solving and similar topics by means of nontrivial simulation models and the like. Third, while this book is already the ninth of a series, it is certainly still within the category of fresh, stimulating, and highly provocative material, and one looks forward to the series continuing at this high level of excellence.

show abstract

“…In a previous study which used college students as subjects (Labouvie, Frohring, Baltes, & Goulet, 1973), an attempt was made to specify those processes by proposing that interactions between ability measures and learning tasks reflect the use of common strategies or skills. Based on the associative-conceptual distinction inherent in many current formulations of developmental learning processes (Goulet, 3973;Jensen, 1971;Kendler & Kendler, 1970), it was expected that the pattern of intercorrelations between ability variables and learning effectiveness would reflect the extent to which subjects used (or did not use) a conceptual strategy. The task selected was free-recall learning, and an attempt was made to manipulate the degree to which subjects would rely on a conceptual strategy, namely subjective organization (Tulving, 1968).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between selected cognitive abilities and learning: A second look.

Labouvie‐Vief

Levin²,

Urberg³

1975

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between learning strategies and cognitive abilities was examined in a series of three experiments. Based on the argument that such relationships ought to follow predictable and differentiated patterns, different strategy manipulations were used in an attempt to moderate the relationship between reasoning and memory abilities and free-recall and paired-associate learning. Results suggested that meaningful differential interrelations can be demonstrated as long as the processes and strategies forming the link between learning and ability test performance are both potent and wellunderstood. Implications of these results for future research into the cross-linkages between intelligence and learning tasks are discussed.Research into intellectual development has for a long time proceeded along two rather divergent routes. On the one hand, the psychometric tradition has emphasized primarily the identification of broad individual difference variables. On the other hand, learning psychologists are usually concerned with manipulating task parameters in order to identify the psychological processes that are involved in efficient or inefficient performance. There has been a gap, however, in the intercommunication between these two approaches (Baltcs & Labouvie, 1973; Whifcman, 1964).Since Cronbach's (1957) emphasis on the

show abstract

Developmental Processes in Discrimination Learning

Cited by 27 publications

References 19 publications

Joint Control and the Selection of Stimuli from Their Description

Joint Control and the Selection of Stimuli from Their Description

Attention and Effort

The relationship between selected cognitive abilities and learning: A second look.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About