Light Reinforcement in Relation to Pre‐test Illumination

Williams, D. Innes; Lowe, G.

doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1970.tb01255.x

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both the learned irrelevance and habituation interpretations describe possible mechanisms that may mediate the effects of decreasing novelty through pre-exposure. Previous theoretical interpretations of the reinforcing effectiveness of SRs [6, 52–54] and more current work from our lab [48–50], support the habituation interpretation. However, in the current experiment a learned irrelevance interpretation cannot be ruled out.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of novelty and methamphetamine on conditioned and sensory reinforcement

Lloyd

Kausch

Gancarz

et al. 2012

Behavioural Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Light onset can be both a sensory reinforcer (SR) with intrinsic reinforcing properties, and a conditioned reinforcer (CR) which predicts a biologically important reinforcer. Stimulant drugs, such as methamphetamine (METH), may increase the reinforcing effectiveness of CRs by enhancing the predictive properties of the CR. In contrast, METH-induced increases in the reinforcing effectiveness of SRs, are mediated by the immediate sensory consequences of the light. Methods The effects of novelty (on SRs) and METH (on both CRs and SRs) were tested. Experiment 1: Rats were pre-exposed to 5 s light and water pairings presented according to a variable-time (VT) 2 min schedule or unpaired water and light presented according to independent, concurrent VT 2 min schedules. Experiment 2: Rats were pre-exposed to 5 s light presented according to a VT 2 min schedule, or no stimuli. In both experiments, the pre-exposure phase was followed by a test phase in which 5 s light onset was made response-contingent on a variable-interval (VI) 2 min schedule and the effects of METH (0.5 mg/kg) were determined. Results Novel light onset was a more effective reinforcer than familiar light onset. METH increased the absolute rate of responding without increasing the relative frequency of responding for both CRs and SRs. Conclusion Novelty plays a role in determining the reinforcing effectiveness of SRs. The results are consistent with the interpretation that METH-induced increases in reinforcer effectiveness of CRs and SRs may be mediated by immediate sensory consequences, rather than prediction.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…Previous studies have reported that pre-exposure to sensory stimuli decreases the reinforcing effectiveness of these stimuli [6, 52–54]. Kish and Baron [53] proposed that responsiveness to a novel stimulus decreases with frequent experience of the stimulus, and increases with longer intervals between successive exposures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of novelty and methamphetamine on conditioned and sensory reinforcement

Lloyd

Kausch

Gancarz

et al. 2012

Behavioural Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, it contrasts directly with that of S. S. Fox (1962) and indirectly with that of D. I. Williams and Lowe (1970). Another study by Williams and Lowe (1972) suggests that some positive findings may be artifactual.…”

Section: Satiation Effectsmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…D. I. Williams and Lowe (1970) compared steady and flickering lights in a different way. They preexposed rats to either steady or flickering light for 5 hour, and a day later gave the rats an opportunity to press a lever in darkness to turn on either a steady or a flickering light for 1 sec.…”

Section: Satiation Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of mere exposure on preferences in nonhuman mammals.

Hill¹

1978

Psychological Bulletin

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is a review of the effects of simple exposure on preferences for lights, tastes, social companions, and miscellaneous other stimuli. In all categories of stimuli, substantial support is found for Zajonc's hypothesis that mere exposure increases preference, but all categories also show evidence of reduced preference following exposure. Which of these effects will dominate appears to depend on different factors for different categories of stimuli. However, most of the findings are consistent with a model in which exposure produces both a long-term increase in preference (more rapidly in some stimulus modalities than in others) and a short-term decrease in preference.How do our preferences among stimuli-that is to say, our likes, dislikes, tastes, and interests-develop and change? In attempting to answer this question, learning theorists have traditionally focused on paradigms that involve pairing of two stimuli, under such rubrics as classical conditioning, secondary reinforcement, and learned drive. Recently, however, there has been increasing interest in paradigms that involve simply the repeated presentation of a given stimulus without its being paired with anything in particular. The greatest impetus to this interest has come from the work of Zajonc and his collaborators on mere exposure, starting with Zajonc's (1968) study. Also relevant are Solomon and Corbit's (1974) work on the temporal dynamics of affect, the study of habituation (e.g., Groves & Thompson, 1970;Leibrecht, 1974), and various other lines of theory and research.

show abstract

“…A number of studies concerned with apparatus familiarity as the independent variable have demonstrated that preexposure to the apparatus facilitates the acquisition of a stimulus-contingent bar press (e.g. Williams & Lowe, 1970.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Latent inhibition and conditioned attention theory.

Lubow

1976

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

419

341

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four experiments are reported of relevance to a conditioned attention theory of latent inhibition (LI) phenomenon. The conditioning suppositions of the theory predict that the addition of a second stimulus in a conditioning relationship to the preexposed stimulus should maintain attention to that stimulus and thus attenuate LI. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated this effect in the context of lick-suppression conditioning. It is further supposed that subject control of the presentation of the preexposed stimulus should maintain attention to that stimulus and thereby reduce LI. This was demonstrated in Experiments 3 and 4, also in lick-suppression conditioning.

show abstract

Light Reinforcement in Relation to Pre‐test Illumination

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Effects of novelty and methamphetamine on conditioned and sensory reinforcement

Effects of novelty and methamphetamine on conditioned and sensory reinforcement

Effects of mere exposure on preferences in nonhuman mammals.

Latent inhibition and conditioned attention theory.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About