Human discrimination learning with simultaneous and successive presentation of stimuli.

Loess, Henry; Duncan, Carl P.

doi:10.1037/h0061719

Cited by 23 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fact that in the initial discrimination the simultaneous was learned in less trials than the successive would support the above assertion. Similar results have been reported by Lipsitt (1961) using children andLoess &Duncan (1952) with older human Ss. Thus in the simultaneous condition at the point of reversal PA is unity or close to unity in both criterion and overtrained Ss.Therefore,onedoesnotfindan ORE.…”

Section: Success Ivesupporting

confidence: 79%

“…One of the deductions from this theory is that the greater the difficulty of the initial discrimination the greater the magnitude of the ORE. Since it is generally found thatthe successive discrimination is more difficult than the simultaneous (Spence, 1952;Lipsitt, 1961;Loess & Duncan, 1952) Lovejoy's theory would seem to predict a greater ORE in the successive discrimination. The present study was conducted to test this possibility.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The overtraining reversal effect under two types of discrimination

et al. 1966

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present experiment was conducted to study possible differences in the overtraining reversal effect (ORE) as a function of whether the discrimination task is simultaneous or successive. None of the recent reviews (Paul, 1965;Mackintosh, 1965;Sperling, 1965) of the ORE deal specifically with the ORE in the successive discrimination. However, a recent mathematical theory by Lovejoy (1966) which is an extension of Mackintosh's (1965) attention theory would seem to make a differential prediction. One of the deductions from this theory is that the greater the difficulty of the initial discrimination the greater the magnitude of the ORE. Since it is generally found thatthe successive discrimination is more difficult than the simultaneous (Spence, 1952;Lipsitt, 1961;Loess & Duncan, 1952) Lovejoy's theory would seem to predict a greater ORE in the successive discrimination. The present study was conducted to test this possibility. Method Apparatus. The apparatus was a vertically mounted display panel 35 in. x 36 in. made from 1/2-in. plywood. Two stimulus apertures 8-1/4 in. x 10 in. separated by a 1/2-in. woodstrip were centered on the display panel. Directly below each stimulus aperture and 2-1/2 in. from the base of the display panel were two spring-held plungers that S pulled to indicate his choice. Atthe lower left-hand side 4-1/2 in. from the left side and 1-1/2 in. from the base was a slot 3 in. x 1 in. through which reinforcers could be delivered into a small cup. The stimuli were black squares mounted on white cards. In the simultaneous group a 2-in. square was paired with a 4-in. square. During presentation the position of the large square relative to the small one varied from right to left. For the successive group the 2-in. squares were paired in one setting, while two 4-in. squares were paired in the second setting.Procedure. Each child was run individually and sat faCing the display board so that the stimulus cards appeared directly before him and the plungers were within easy reach. S was instructed that he was to play a game in which he would be shown cards with squares on them. As a card came into view, he was to choose one square or the other and then pull the plunger beneath. If correct, he would receive a marble; if incorrect, no marble would be given. The game was to see how soon S could get a marble every time. Following the instructions E presented the stimulus cards from behind the display board, recorded all responses, and delivered

show abstract

Section: Success Ivesupporting

confidence: 79%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The overtraining reversal effect under two types of discrimination

et al. 1966

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several experiments with human participants and nonhuman subjects have been carried out to compare the acquisition of the discriminated response in simultaneous and successive simple discrimination procedures (Bitterman, Tyler, & Elam, 1955;Bitterman & Wodinsky, 1953;Carter & Eckerman, 1975;Grice, 1949;Lipsitt, 1961;Loess & Duncan, 1952;MacCaslin, 1954;Mundy, Honey, & Dwyer, 2007;North & Jeeves, 1956;Weise & Bitterman, 1951;Wodinsky, Varley, & Bitterman, 1954). In most cases, especially with nonhuman subjects, the results suggest that simultaneous presentation of stimuli gives rise to a faster discrimination process when compared with successive presentation of stimuli (but exceptions are found in Bitterman et al, 1955;Bitterman & Wodinsky, 1953;Weise & Bitterman, 1951).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing the Stimulus Control Acquisition in Simple Discrimination Tasks through Eye Movement

Huziwara¹,

Silva²,

Pérez³

et al. 2015

Psicol. Reflex. Crit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to investigate whether simultaneous or successive presentation of stimuli is related to the duration of eye fi xation (i.e., the time spent gazing a specifi c stimulus), this study described the eye movements of young adults in simultaneous and successive simple discrimination tasks. Using 12 landscape scenes as visual stimuli, three participants were exposed to a simple discrimination training with simultaneously presented stimuli (Si Procedure) and then to a second simple discrimination training with successively presented stimuli (Su Procedure). Another three participants were exposed to the Procedure in the opposite order. In both cases, the learning criterion was that at least 90% of the responses should be correct in one block. Eye movements were recorded during the whole experiment. Participants achieved the learning criteria in both procedures. Beyond that, eye fi xation time in the Su Procedure was higher than in the Si Procedure, regardless of the training sequence. Taken together with previous results in different experiments, our fi ndings suggest that the duration of eye fi xation plays a central role in the establishment of different stimulus control topographies. Keywords: Eye movements, eye fi xation time, simultaneous discrimination, successive discrimination, young adults. ResumoCom o objetivo de investigar se a apresentação simultânea ou sucessiva de estímulos estaria relacionada com a duração da fi xação do olhar (i.e., o tempo gasto fi xando um estímulo específi co), este estudo descreveu os movimentos dos olhos de adultos em tarefas de discriminação simples simultâneas e sucessivas. Utilizando 12 cenas de paisagens como estímulos visuais, três participantes foram expostos a um treino de discriminação simples com estímulos apresentados simultaneamente (Procedimento Si) e, em seguida, a um segundo treino de discriminação simples com estímulos apresentados sucessivamente (Procedimento Su). Outros três participantes foram expostos ao Procedimento em ordem inversa. Em ambos os casos, uma concentração mínima de 90% das respostas ao estímulo correto, em um mesmo bloco, defi nia a aquisição da discriminação. Os movimentos dos olhos foram registrados durante todo o experimento. Participantes atingiram os critérios de aquisição da discriminação em ambos os procedimentos. Além disso, o tempo de fi xação do olhar no Procedimento Su foi maior do que no Procedimento Si, independentemente da sequência de treino. Considerados em conjunto com resultados prévios em diferentes experimentos, nossos dados sugerem que a duração da fi xação do olhar exerce um papel central no estabelecimento de diferentes topografi as de controle de estímulos. Palavras-chave: Movimentos dos olhos, tempo de fi xação dos olhos, discriminação simultânea, discriminação sucessiva, jovens adultos.By analyzing simple, everyday events, it is possible to verify that some aspects of the environment infl uence the probability of occurrence of behaviors. A red traffi c light, a road sign, or an offi cer's signal are examples...

show abstract

“…The present study describes a different operant procedure for measuring subjective visual acuity thresholds in nonverbal children, suggested by Blough's (1971) method for measuring distance acuity in pigeons. First, a simultaneous (choice) discrimination paradigm was used in training and testing because basic research with normal and retarded children indicates that simultaneous discriminations are learned more rapidly than successive discriminations when the stimuli are similar (Horowitz, 1965;Jeffrey, 1961;Lipsett, 1961;Loess and Duncan, 1952). Second, a graduated stimulus change, or fading, procedure was used to teach a discrimination between Snellen Es differing in vertical-horizontal orientation, since fading procedures have successfully taught other orientation discriminations to retarded and psychotic children (Macht, 1971;Schreibman, 1975;Touchette, 1971).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A SIMULTANEOUS DISCRIMINATION PROCEDURE FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF VISION IN NONVERBAL CHILDREN¹

Newsom

Simon

1977

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few nonverbal developmentally disabled children ever receive adequate vision assessment because of their limited language skills. The present study details a simultaneous discrimination procedure for measuring subjective visual acuity in such children. A stimulus fading procedure was used to train a discrimination between Snellen Es differing in orientation, and a psychophysical tracking method was used to determine acuity thresholds. The procedure was tested with 11 nonverbal autistic and schizophrenic children and validated with four nonpsychotic children. Eight of the psychotic children were successfully examined in one to three sessions. Two of these children were identified as having significant acuity losses. The validity assessment showed that the experimental procedure resulted in thresholds equal to or slightly lower than those obtained with the Illiterate E chart.

show abstract

Human discrimination learning with simultaneous and successive presentation of stimuli.

Cited by 23 publications

References 8 publications

The overtraining reversal effect under two types of discrimination

The overtraining reversal effect under two types of discrimination

Analyzing the Stimulus Control Acquisition in Simple Discrimination Tasks through Eye Movement

A SIMULTANEOUS DISCRIMINATION PROCEDURE FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF VISION IN NONVERBAL CHILDREN¹

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Human discrimination learning with simultaneous and successive presentation of stimuli.

Cited by 23 publications

References 8 publications

The overtraining reversal effect under two types of discrimination

The overtraining reversal effect under two types of discrimination

Analyzing the Stimulus Control Acquisition in Simple Discrimination Tasks through Eye Movement

A SIMULTANEOUS DISCRIMINATION PROCEDURE FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF VISION IN NONVERBAL CHILDREN1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

A SIMULTANEOUS DISCRIMINATION PROCEDURE FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF VISION IN NONVERBAL CHILDREN¹