Strain differences in the facilitative effects of 5-7-diphenyl-1-3-diazadamantan-6-01 (1757 I.S.) on maze learning.

McGaugh, James L.; Westbrook, William H.; Burt, George S.

doi:10.1037/h0044608

Cited by 39 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A later study (McGaugh and Cole, 1965) found that ITI interacted with age, for in young rats S 1 was superior only at a long ITI (30 min). The difference between S 1 and S 3 with massed trials was eliminated by pretrial injection of the drug 1757 I.S., which improved learning only for S 3 (McGaugh, Westbrook, and Burt, 1961). Spaced trials (one per day) gave equivalent performance for S 1 and S 3 on a 14-unit T maze, and posttrial injection of picrotoxin greatly facilitated learning by S 3 only (Breen and McGaugh, 1961).…”

Section: Memorymentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetic experiments with animal learning: A critical review

Wahłsten

1972

Behavioral Biology

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The basic patterns of inheritance of learning ability in animals have been delineated. Summaries of strain differences in learning rate, responses to selective breeding for learning, heritabilities of learning phenotypes, and heterosis and overdominance are presented. In addition, the patterns of inheritance are shown to vary with the early environment.The causes of genetic differences have received much attention, but much of the research is inconclusive. Both general learning ability and task-specific abilities are important, but their relative importance is not known for most learning tasks. Strain differences have been found to vary widely in response to variations in stimulus parameters, motivational levels, temporal spacing of trials, and pharmacological manipulations. However, in only a few cases have strain differences in learning actually been shown to be attributable to differences in sensory capacities, motivation, memory or activity levels. The physiological bases for differences are totally unknown. The pathways of gene action on learning also await discovery.Although some researchers have claimed to study the adaptive value of learning, their exclusive utilization of laboratory populations precludes meaningful interpretation of their results.Several methodological shortcomings of various experiments are considered, and important areas for future research are suggested. Article:Learning is a phenotype which has engaged the interests of numerous researchers seeking genetic bases for behavioral differences. In fact, much of the earliest research identifiable as behavior genetics dealt with some aspect of learning in animals (Bagg, 1916;Yerkes, 1916;Tolman, 1924). Ensuing experimentation was performed primarily by psychologists using genetically ill-defined populations. The rather recent appearance of standardized inbred mouse strains with widespread availability has led to renewed interest in the genetic analysis of learning, as well as other phenotypes. Several sophisticated quantitative genetic tools are now readily available for the study of learning. Examples of the application to learning research of selective breeding, the classical cross, the diallel cross, sib analysis, parent-offspring regression, and single-gene analysis have appeared recently.A central motive for compiling the present review is the author's opinion that the increase in genetic sophistication has not been paralleled by a similar growth in the sophistication of measures of learning. In many studies it appears that learning was selected as a phenotype of convenience and general interest.Similarly, the questions about learning investigated have tended to be simplistic and of little interest to those concerned with the nature of the learning process itself. Many recent studies have raised issues that were presented in the earliest research and therefore have contributed little to progress in the area. This is an unfortunate situation in view of the potential power of genetic techniques to answer important questions abou...

show abstract

Section: Memorymentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Neither Tryon (1940) nor McGaugh, Westbrook, and Burt (1961) found heterosis in a cross of the Tryon bright (S 1 ) and dull (S 3 ) strains. In both studies the F 1 mean was very close to MP.…”

Section: Examination Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic experiments with animal learning: A critical review

Wahłsten

1972

Behavioral Biology

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has also been noted that the Tryon dull strain is helped by the administration of facilitatory drugs much more than the bright strain, suggesting some sort of ceiling effect (McGaugh, Westbrook, & Burt, 1961). Thus it is probable that the present failure to observe strychnine-induced facili'tation was caused by a combination of task difficulty and strain differences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

Lack of facilitation of learning by strychnine sulphate

Carlson

1966

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A study designed to test the hypothesis that strychnine sulphate facilitates learning showed that strychnine has no effect on the learning, performance, or reversal of a simple maze habit. Possible explanations of the discrepancy between these results and those of other experimenters emphasize the role of strain differences and task difficulty.A number of recent studies have shown that preor post-trial injections of strychnine sulphate and other drugs have facilitatory effects on learning in the rat (for a review see McGaugh & Petrinovich, 1965). However, a few experimenters have found no facilitation of learning attributable to strychnine. For example, the findings of Keleman & Bovet (1961), although they are usually interpreted as favorable to the strychnine-facilitation hypothesis, can be seen as pointing to quite another conclusion. They report that strychnine does not speed the learning of an avoidance response to shock, but only quickens the generalization of the learned response to a heat stimulus. Furthermore, Prien, Wayner, & Kahan (1963) have attacked what they feel are certain methodological flaws (e.g., data analysis and controlfor sex differences) in previous work. Improving the procedure, they found no differences in maze errors between several experimental (strychnine and picrotoxin) and control (saline) groups. The basis of the discrepant findings is not known, owing mainly to the paucity of published negative results. Further reports of positive and negative experimental results should elucidate the conditions under which the facilitatory effect mayor may not be obtained. Thus the present study was designed to determine the effects of strychnine on the learning, performance, and reversal of a simple maze habit by hooded rats. MethodThe Ss were 18 experimentally naive male hooded rats of the Royal Victoria Hospital strain, 200-250 gm., obtained from Quebec Breeding Farm. They were housed in pairs with ad libitum water. A schedule of 1 hr. in 24 hrs. feeding of Purina Lab Chow pellets was begun 3 weeks prior to training and continued throughout the experiment. Ss were tested when 8-10 hr. food deprived.The apparatus consisted of a T-maze, constructed of 1/4 in. unpainted plywood, with a grid floor and wire mesh cover. The interior dimensions were: height, 5-1/4 in.; width, 4 in.; stem length, 12 in.; length of each arm, 11 in.; length of start and goal boxes, 7 in. Metal food cups were mounted in the middle of the end wall of each goal box, 1-1/2 in. above the grid. Guillotine doors controlled access to the start

show abstract

“…On the other hand, when ample time was offered becween trials, the differences in rate of neural activity were no longer important since all Ss then had ample time to complete the consolidation of their neural perseverative processes. Support for this interpretation is provided by the finding that when strychnine sulfate, which increases neural activity, was administered before massed practice training trials, the differences between bright and dull strains of rats in maze learning were eliminated ( McGaugh, Westbrook, & Burt, 1961 ) .…”

Section: Massed Us Distributed Practicementioning

confidence: 92%

ABILITY TO AUTOMATIZE AND AUTOMATIZATION COGNITIVE STYLE: A VALIDATION STUDY Monograph Supplement 2-V23

Broverman¹,

Broverman²,

Klaiber³

1966

Perceptual and Motor Skills

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An index of automatization ability was constructed by assuming that ( I ) the response rate to repeated common stimuli reflects, in part, the ability to benefit from past practice and ( 2 ) such response rates should be corrected for general abiliry level. The relat~onship of such an index to mastery of a novel task was examined. Fifty male Ss were first given distributed and then massed practice trials on a coded additions cask. A second sample of 30 Ss was given twice the number of distributed practice trials followed by massed practice. In both samples, the automatization index related to performances under massed bur not distributed practice. The results were discussed in the context of physiological differences previously found related to the automatization index.Automatized behaviors are behaviors which have been so well practiced and overlearned that a minimum of conscious effort is required for their successful, efficient execution. Such behaviors include the bulk of everyday activities, e.g., maintaining one's balance, walking, writing, reading, talking, maintaining perceptual constancies, etc.The phenomenon of automatization was reported by the introspectionists who while studying attention processes noticed that the act of performing a task tended to fade from consciousness as learning accrued with practice (Ach, 1905).The amounts of physical and mental effort as well as the amount of time required to perform tasks were also noted to diminish as non-essential parts of the task performance disappeared with practice (Solomons, 1899; Thorndike, 1898). The tendency of practice to induce behavioral parsimony has been variously termed the "law of least effort," or "least action" and the "principle of maxima and minima" ( Adams, 1931 ) .The inuospectioniscs also noted that as a task became automatized it interferred less with the simultaneous performance of other tasks (James, 1909;Solomons, 1899). Ford ( 1929) interpreted this phenomenon with the teleological proposition that the function of learning is to reduce the amount of attention required for the performance of a given task in order to make more attentional energies available for the acquisition of new tasks or behaviors.

show abstract

Strain differences in the facilitative effects of 5-7-diphenyl-1-3-diazadamantan-6-01 (1757 I.S.) on maze learning.

Abstract: We are indebted to Daniel Bovet of the Istituto Superiore di Sanita, Rome, for supplying the 1757 I.S. used and for stimulating this research. We would also like to express our appreciation to D.

Cited by 39 publications

References 8 publications

Genetic experiments with animal learning: A critical review

Genetic experiments with animal learning: A critical review

Lack of facilitation of learning by strychnine sulphate

ABILITY TO AUTOMATIZE AND AUTOMATIZATION COGNITIVE STYLE: A VALIDATION STUDY Monograph Supplement 2-V23

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About