Drive (D) as a function of hours of hunger (h).

Yamaguchi, Harry G.

doi:10.1037/h0060763

Cited by 34 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The present results may also be taken to lend further support to the Yerkes-Dodson Law, (Yerkes & Dodson, 1908). This well-known statement of the relation between task difficulty and motivation has been given consistent, if sporadic, support over the past fifty years, recently for instance by Broadhurst (1959).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 84%

“…theory of drive can predict anything other than an improvement in performance with increasing periods of deprivation, up to the time when the effects of inanition are more than negligible. Evidence on the inanition component in Hullian theory is rather scant: Hull (1951) quoted a study made by Yamaguchi (1951) which showed a decrement in the performance of rats (presumably due to inanition) after 60 hr of food-deprivation. An experiment by Horenstein (1951) examining in detail the effects of up to 24 hr of deprivation in rats showed no evidence of a decline in performance, though the most rapid increase was found after only 2 hr.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effect of Short Periods of Food‐deprivation on Human Performance

Kennedy¹,

Keene²

1966

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports the effect of periods of food-deprivation varying from 0 to 10 hr on human performance in two simple tasks. The argument is advanced that an interpretation of the results in terms of traditional Hullian multiplicative drive theory is unsatisfactory. A possible alternative to this approach is considered.There are comparatively few studies of the effects of short periods of food deprivation on the performance of human subjects. In the main, these have directed attention towards selective effects in perception, and systematic changes in wordassociation tasks (Brown, 1961). However, information on the effects of food deprivation in a variety of situations, including more complex learning tasks, is of some importance for traditional Hullian theory (Hull, 1943(Hull, , 1951. I n particular, this theory would assume food deprivation to contribute directly to strength of drive ( D ) , which, in turn, is related to performance in a monotonic fashion. Thus, if the effects of inanition may be ignored over short periods of time, performance would be expected to improve steadily as the level of deprivation increased from, say, 0 to 10 hr.There is now a considerable body of evidence for a curvilinear relation between various measures of 'arousal' and performance (Malmo, 1958). This arousal theory, which is to a degree physiologically committed, suggests that an optimal level of cortical activity is necessary for the performance of a task. The Hullian theorist with regard to the mechanism of the hunger drive in human subjects would presumably speak in terms of some substance present in the blood which bathes the neural structures constituting and thereby 'sensitizes ' them, increasing the probability of their responding. Although the argument seems somewhat tenuous it could be suggested for the arousal theorist that stimuli characteristic of increasing deprivation would serve to raise the level of cortical activity. Both theoretical systems remain viable in spite of their physiological encumbrances. Malmo (1958) equated 'arousal ' and 'drive ', suggesting a relation between drive and performance distinct from that of the Hullian theorist. Differential prediction is made difficult by the fact that obtained curvilinearity in the relation of drive to performance may be derived in the Hullian case by the postulated positive relation between inanition ( E ) and deprivation; and also by the fact that D may be expected to enhance not only 'correct ' responses, but also competing ,'incorrect ', response tendencies. This paper discusses the performance of human subjects in two situations: a relatively simple checking test (Minnesota Clerical Test, Andrew & Paterson, 1946), and a more complex paired-associate verbal learning task.For the checking test, the arousal theory would predict an 'inverted U ' relation, the exact position of the optimal level being a function of the difficulty of the task, and open to determination. In this case it is difficult to see how a multiplicative

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 84%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Short Periods of Food‐deprivation on Human Performance

Kennedy¹,

Keene²

1966

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of studies (e.g., Crespi, 1942;Logan, Beier, & Ellis, 1955;Zeaman, 1949) indicate that response speed is an increasing function of reward magnitude. Response speed is also an increasing function of deprivation time, up to a maximum point which appears to occur after about 2\ days of hunger (e.g., Barry, 1958;Besch & Reynolds, 1958;Cotton, 1953;Yamaguchi, 1951). Published studies of deprivation time have not been concerned with deprivation effects on the goal gradient, dealing only with starting speed, performance speed, or some combination of the two.…”

Section: Deprivation and Reward Magnitude Effects On Speed Throughout...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Deprivation and reward magnitude effects on speed throughout the goal gradient.

Weiss¹

1960

Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…I believe that the situation in Goldstein's experiment is analogous to extinguishing a satiated animal, or at least one who is partially satiated. A number of experiments (Yamaguchi, 1951;Koch & Daniel, 1945) have demonstrated that rats which are satiated, or partially satiated, just prior to extinction trials do show minimal resistance to extinction when compared to Ss who learned under similar conditions but are deprived in extinction. The unusual acquisition curve, and the precipitous extinction rate found by Goldstein (1967) in his experimental group, may even be explained in this fashion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial probability learning by cats

Poland

Warren

1967

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Groups of six cats were trained, with noncorrection or with guidance, for 1200 trials on each of four ratios of reinforcement: 70:30, 60:40, 40:60 and 30:70, in a spatial probability learning experiment. Both groups eventually learned to choose the more frequently rewarded stimulus on almost every trial, the noncorrection Ss learning to do so much sooner than the guidanc e Ss. The results of this experiment with cats tend to agree with previous observations that rats and monkeys maximize on spatial probability problems. The available evidence, however, indicates that cats tested with guidance on spatial probability problems learn to maximize considerably more slowly than rhesus monkeys and that monkeys are, in turn , inferior to rats. Bitterman (1965a, b) maintains that vertebrate classes differ qualitatively in performance on probability learning tasks. This view implies that there should be no major qualitative differences among species of the same class. The available data are, however, too limited to provide a realistic estimate of intraclass variability; the mammals, for example, are represented only by rats and monkeys. The purpose of the present experiment was to determine whether the choice behavior of cats on a spatial probability problem is qualitatively similar to that of rats and monkeys tested under analogous conditions. This investigation was motivated by the observation of rather impressive differences between the performance of cats and monkeys in visual probability learning (Warren & Beck, 1966). MethodTwelve mature cats, nine mongrel and three Siamese, were studied. All of the Ss had previously served in learning set experiments, and all had been trained on visual probability problems, but none had participated in any experiment on spatial probability learning before this experiment.The cats were tested in the WGTA. The manipulanda were identical 2.5 x 4.0 rectangles cut from 3/4 in. lumber which were painted dark gray, and presented on a medium gray test tray, containing two food wells 12 in. apart.The Ss were tested 1200 trials on each of four ratios of reinforcement in the following sequence: 70:30, 60:40, 40:60, and 30:70, with 50 trialS' being given in each test session and five sessions per week. The 12 Ss were assigned to two groups of six animals each, the Noncorrection and Guidance groups. The Noncorrection group was trained with a strict non correction procedure throughout the experiment; S was allowed only a single response on each trial. For Guidance Ss each trial ended with a reinforced response. When the cat's initial response on a given trial was incorrect, the opaque screen of the WGT A was lowered, the object on the nonrewarded side of the tray was positioned behind the empty food well, and the baited food well remained covered with its object. The test tray was then presented to S, and the trial ended only when it displaced the object covering the rewarded food well and secured the reinforcement. Only initial responses were considered in analyzing the results.For half the Ss...

show abstract

Drive (D) as a function of hours of hunger (h).

Cited by 34 publications

References 17 publications

The Effect of Short Periods of Food‐deprivation on Human Performance

The Effect of Short Periods of Food‐deprivation on Human Performance

Deprivation and reward magnitude effects on speed throughout the goal gradient.

Spatial probability learning by cats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About