Observation and shaping learning: A comparison using Long Evans rats

Jacoby, Keith E.; Dawson, Michael E.

doi:10.3758/bf03332675

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several recent experiments have compared observational proeedures with shaping as techniques for training rats to leve rp ress for positive reinforeement (Corson, 1967;PoweIl, 1968;PoweIl, Saunders, & Thompson, 1968;Jacoby & Dawson, 1969). The results of these experiments do not agree.…”

contrasting

confidence: 54%

“…The performance of rats under thc con trol procedures suggests, in addition, that the contribution of visual observation to learning is relatively minor in rats, wh ich is contrary tothe hypothesis of Jacoby & Dawson (1969).…”

contrasting

confidence: 48%

“…All of the modifications employed by Jacoby & Dawson (1969) were incorporated in the present charnber.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Jaeoby & Dawson (1969) employed teehniques designed to optimize the visual proeess in their experiment. Most of these techniques were ineorporated in the present experiment for the same purpose.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Visual factors in observational learning with rats

Powell

Burns

1970

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

contrasting

confidence: 54%

contrasting

confidence: 48%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Visual factors in observational learning with rats

Powell

Burns

1970

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The choice of the control group often depends on the way the experimental questions are asked. For example, early research appeared to assume that rats could learn through observation of the performance of a demonstrator, and the question was, did such learning occur more quickly than the more typical shaping procedures (i.e., by successive approximations) (Corson, 1967;Jacoby & Dawson, 1969;Powell, 1968;Powell & Burns, 1970;Powell, Saunders, & Thompson, 1969). The experimental question asked in these early experiments appears to have been a practical one: Would observation of the demonstration of a response be a faster means of training rats to bar press?…”

Section: Otivational F Ac Tor Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Imitation in Animals: Evidence, Function, and Mechanisms

Zentall¹

2001

Cybernetics and Systems

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The terms social learning and social in£uence have been used descriptively and theoretically to characterize a broad range of animal behavior from physical antipredatory adaptations such as eye spots, which are totally under genetic control, to the human capacity for the exaggeration of individual characteristics, known as caricature, which are largely under cognitive control. In the present review, the various forms of social in£uence and social learning are identi¢ed and distinghished from imitation, a term that generally has been reserved for behavioral matching that cannot be accounted for using simpler speci¢cally predisposed, motivational, or learning mechanisms. It is suggested that much of the ambiguity in the literature concerning the various forms of social learning can be attributed to the distinction between the function of a behavior and the mechanisms responsible for its occurrence. Finally, the various mechanisms that have been proposed to account for imitative learning are presented and an attempt is made to evaluate them.When the term imitation is used by psychologists it typically implies more than the simple reproduction of behavior. In everyday language, imitation carries with it the implication of intentionality or purposiveness (see Mitchell, 1987). When humans use imitation to describe their own behavior, it implies that there is an understanding of the relation between that behavior and the behavior being modeled (or visually demonstrated). For example, when a child imitates the

show abstract