1966
DOI: 10.3758/bf03331035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pre- and post-trial stimulation: Effects on retention

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

1970
1970
1976
1976

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is consistent with detention effects resulting from extinction (to those conditioned stimulus elements present during detention) and retroactive interference (provided interference is assumed greatest when the irrelevant information concerns aspects of the contextual cues of the training situation). Calhoun and Murphy (1966) presented data supporting this assumption for a passive avoidance task similar to that used by . Similarly, the memory deficit produced by detention increases with diminishing intervals between training and detention (e.g., .…”
Section: Detentionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…This is consistent with detention effects resulting from extinction (to those conditioned stimulus elements present during detention) and retroactive interference (provided interference is assumed greatest when the irrelevant information concerns aspects of the contextual cues of the training situation). Calhoun and Murphy (1966) presented data supporting this assumption for a passive avoidance task similar to that used by . Similarly, the memory deficit produced by detention increases with diminishing intervals between training and detention (e.g., .…”
Section: Detentionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…SUBJECTS The Ss were ISO male ICR mice, approximately 90 days of age, and housed in groups of 12 prior to the experiment, with ad Iib food and water. APPRATUS Tbe "learning" apparatus, previously described in Calhoun & Murphy (1966), was a step-off device similar to that described by Essman & Alpern (1964). A circular platform, 7.6 cm in diam, could be lowered from 20.3 cm above a large platform to within 1.27 cm of the lower platform.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%