PRE in a T-maze brightness discrimination within and between subjects.

Spear, Norman E.; Spitzner, Joseph H.

doi:10.1037/h0024171

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The significant difference between Pn(Ai') and P L (Ai) is primarily due to the depression of performance on low-risk trials. This negative contrast effect is consistent with the results of other probability learning studies (Lipkin, 1966;Schnorr et al, 1966;Swensson, 1965) and of studies of response speeds in rats (e.g., Bower, 1961;Ludvigson & Gay, 1966;Spear & Spitzner, 1967), in which a number of experimental paradigms have been used.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

Negative contrast in human probability learning as a function of incentive magnitudes.

Schnorr¹,

Myers²

1967

Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

6 groups of 20 students were exposed to a 2-choice situation under 2 levels of risk, the groups differing in the pair of risk levels they experienced. Asymptotic predictive behavior revealed negative contrast for all groups. Group differences in the amount of negative contrast were related to the absolute differences between the risk levels. The Ss' estimates of event probabilities (»rs) also showed negative contrast, and JTS and predictive behavior were significantly correlated. Conditional statistics consistently departed from those obtained in between-Ss studies, and further analyses suggested that response dependencies were a function of the relative risk levels of successive trials. The latter 2 findings deviated from predictions derived from stimulus sampling theory.Recent experimentation in human probability learning has indicated that performance relationships under varying levels of incentive are contextual phenomena. When 5s are required to predict which of two events will occur on each of a series of trials, with a predetermined gain or loss associated with the correctness of each prediction, the pattern of 5s' predictive behavior is dependent upon the number of risk levels they experience. With exposure to one level of incentive (between-5s design, absolute method), the probability of predicting the more frequent event, P(A l ), differs only slightly or not at all at asymptote for groups exposed to different incentive magnitudes

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

Negative contrast in human probability learning as a function of incentive magnitudes.

Schnorr¹,

Myers²

1967

Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, Ss in Groups 100-33BP and 100-33B continued to run to the formerly CRF alternative on free choice trials even though they had greater forced-trial running speeds to their previously PRF alternative. Related data suggest that this inverse relationship was not an artifact of receiving the free choice only on the first trial of each day-(l) There were no systematic changes in the running-speed relationships from the beginning to the end of the daily session of trials, and (2) When a free trial has been given both early and late in a daily session (for example, Spear, 1964;Spear & Spitzner, 1967) equivalent results have been obtained with either triaL…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…In addition, a uniform increase in resistance to extinction of responding to both CRF and PRF has accompanied this within-S PRE. While this may indicate that the effect of a given percentage reinforcement is generalized across discriminanda (due to common stimulus elements), Spear & Spitzner (1967) have suggested mediated generalization (cf., Amsel, 1964) as a more likely cause.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

PRE within Ss: Conventional effect on differential speeds, reverse effect on choices

Spear

Spitzner

1967

Psychon Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Unfortunately, few data speak to this issue, and most have been derived from tests involving many conditioning trials and appetitive reinforcers. In such studies, researchers observed an increase in resistance to extinction over longer retention intervals (e.g., Aiken & Gibson, 1965;Hilgard & Campbell, 1936;Spear & Spitzner, 1967;Youtz, 1938). This effect has been explained as a result of the generalization gradient's flattening as the retention interval increases, thus weakening the discrimination between acquisition and extinction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Order and duration of stimuli are important determinants of reactivation

Arnold

Spear

1993

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior cuing treatments intended to alleviate the forgetting of a conditioned aversion to an odor were tested with 18-day-old rats. Previous experiments had shown that when such pups were conditioned with the use of a CS-/CS+ procedure, pretest presentation of the CS-or US, but not the CS+, alleviated the forgetting otherwise seen after a 3·h retention interval. In Experiment 1, it was determined that the forgetting was not alleviated if the CS-was either preceded or followed by presentation of the CS+, despite the fact that the CS-/CS+ ordering mimicked that of original conditioning. Experiment 2 was an examination of the balance of extinction and reactivation effects caused by presenting the CS+ for varying durations following the 3·h retention interval. The forgetting over this interval was alleviated if the CS+ was presented for 5 or 15 sec, but not 30 sec. With an increase in duration of exposure from 15 to 30 sec, the consequences of the CS+ as a prior cuing treatment apparently shifted from reactivation to extinction. Experiment 3 was a test of the interaction between the consequences of different lengths of CS+ exposure and the effectiveness of adding CS-to the CS+ as a reactivation treatment. The varied effectiveness of reactivation treatments is discussed in terms of a change in stimulus conditions from training to reactivation.The necessary and sufficient conditions for the alleviation of forgetting remain unsettled in memory research. One effective treatment in the alleviation of forgetting is the presentation of a reminder, or prior cue. Many authors have noted the importance of such procedures, which are typically referred to as reactivation treatments (Gordon, 1981(Gordon, , 1983 Rovee-Collier, Sullivan, Enright, Lucas, & Fagen, 1980;Spear, 1978;Spear, Miller, & Jagielo, 1990;Spear & Parsons, 1976). A reactivation treatment involves exposing the subject to a specified aspect of the original training episode prior to a retention test. Reactivation treatments have been used to alleviate forgetting that results from many different sources, such as long retention intervals (Gordon, Smith, & Katz, 1979;Spear & Parsons, 1976), short retention intervals (Feldman & Gordon, 1979;Gordon & Feldman, 1978), and electroconvulsive shock (R. R. Miller & Springer, 1973). Reactivation treatments have also been shown to alleviate forgetting in preweanling animals (Campbell & Jaynes, 1966) and in human infants (Rovee-Collier et al., 1980).In a recent series of experiments, J. S. Miller, Jagielo, and Spear (1989Spear ( , 1991 McKinzie for their comments on an early version of the manuscript. We would also like to thank Teri Tanenhaus for secretarial assistance in preparing the manuscript, Norman Richter for technical assistance, and Heather Rabine for assistance in collecting the data. Requests for reprints may be addressed to N. E. Spear, Center for Developmental Psychobiology, Binghamtom University, Binghamton, NY 13902. rats were exposed to a lemon odor (CS -) prior to the pairing of a second odor, methyl salicy...

show abstract

PRE in a T-maze brightness discrimination within and between subjects.

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Negative contrast in human probability learning as a function of incentive magnitudes.

Negative contrast in human probability learning as a function of incentive magnitudes.

PRE within Ss: Conventional effect on differential speeds, reverse effect on choices

Order and duration of stimuli are important determinants of reactivation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About