The Delayed-Response Problem

Fletcher, Harold J.

doi:10.1016/b978-1-4832-2820-4.50011-1

Cited by 86 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This procedure made the task analogous to the conventional delayed-matching procedure in that only two postdelay response choices were available. Additionally, the procedure permitted the dolphin to potentially "bridge" the delay interval following sound A or B by orienting toward the correct paddle or by using other overt mediational cues (Fletcher, 1965). Direct delayed discriminations have been studied in the pigeon (Smith, 1967).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory delayed discriminations by the dolphin: Nonequivalence with delayed-matching performance

Thompson

Herman

1981

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Working memory in a bottlenosed dolphin was tested in both indirect and direct auditory delayed-discrimination tasks in which a correct spatial response was conditional upon the nature of a preceding sound. In the indirect task, either one of two possible sounds was briefly presented. After a prescribed delay, the dolphin was cued to go either to a left-hand or right-hand paddle pair, Responses to the outer paddle of a pair were rewarded following sound A, and responses to the inner paddle of a pair were rewarded after sound B. In the direct delayeddiscrimination task, only one paddle pair was used in each session. In both tasks, the delay interval between the discriminative sound stimulus and the opportunity for a spatial response was progressively increased over sessions until the animal failed to meet a specified performance criterion or self-terminated a session. Delay limits of about 30 and 60 sec were obtained in the indirect and direct tasks, respectively. The increase in delay limit in the latter task was attributable to the use of an overt mediatio~response during the longer delays. In both cases, however, the obtained delay limits fell considerably short of the 2-to 3-min limits obtained in auditory delayed-matching studies using the same test sounds and the same subject. The task differences indicate that working memory functions cannot depend upon memory of the predelay stimulus alone. but must be determined in part by additional processes.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory delayed discriminations by the dolphin: Nonequivalence with delayed-matching performance

Thompson

Herman

1981

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Relative to other delayed response tasks (e.g., Fletcher, 1965;Heise, 1975;Olton, 1978), the OMS paradigm offers two advantages for the study of memory in animals. First, it minimizes the importance of peripheral mediating responses.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, it minimizes the importance of peripheral mediating responses. Since the subject is required to attend to discriminative stimuli both before and after the retention interval, the subject cannot "bridge" the retention interval simply by orienting toward the correct response alternative (e.g., Fletcher, 1965); the correct choice cannot be determined until after the comparison stimuli are presented. Second, in contrast to many delayed response tasks (e.g., delayed alternation), which require the subject to remember responses or response locations, OMS tasks may employ exteroceptive stimuli that permit a rigorous manipulation of stimulus parameters and precise specification of stimulus and retention interval duration.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of proactive interference on rats’ continuous nonmatching-to-sample performance

Pontecorvo

1983

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats performed a new delayed matching-to-sample task-the continuous nonmatching-tosample task. A variable number of trials with one stimulus alternated with trials with a second stimulus. A response on the trial following a stimulus change (nonmatch trial) was reinforced. Responses to repeated stimuli were never reinforced. Rats could maximize reinforcement by remembering across the intertrial interval which stimulus was presented on the previous trial. Sequential analysis indicated that interference from previous conflicting trials (proactive interference, PI) reduced response accuracy but did not affect retention: Accuracy was lower on trials following a nonmatch trial than on trials following repeated stimuli. Furthermore, accuracy increased as a function of the time between the to-be-remembered nonmatch trial and the previous interfering trial. However, neither time between trials nor the distance from a stimulus change affected the rate of decline in accuracy over the retention interval.

show abstract

“…Possibly, the males acted less upon gaze cues because they were less accustomed to losing competitions for resources; in this captive environment a single adult male can enforce exclusive access to receptive females and priority of access to food. Alternatively, it has been suggested that females perform better on delayed-response problems because they are less distractable than males, and this may offer some explanation for the gender differences observed (Fletcher, 1965). It would be interesting to consider responsiveness to gaze cues as a function of social status in other contexts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, it has long been known that introducing a screen during delays diminishes performance on delayed-response tasks (Fletcher 1965); the screen and objects might simply increase the complexity of the task and distract from cue-reading.…”

Section: Study 2 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of human visual attention cues by olive baboons (Papio anubis) in a competitive task.

Vick¹,

Anderson²

2003

Journal of Comparative Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability of four olive baboons (Papio anubis) to use human gaze cues during a competitive task was investigated; the baboons were allowed to remove only the non-fixated one of two simultaneously presented food items. Three baboons successfully learned to exploit the human's head orientation as a cue to obtain a food item, and one individual also learned to use eye direction alone. As the baboons did not receive prior training with gross gestural cues, their performance suggests that the competitive paradigm may be more conducive to gaze monitoring in nonhuman primates than the standard objectchoice paradigm. However, the baboons were insensitive to whether the experimenter could actually perceive the food item and therefore use of visual orientation cues may not be indicative of visual perspective-taking abilities in baboons. Performance was disrupted by the introduction of a screen and objects to conceal the food items, and to a lesser degree by the absence of movement in cues presented.

show abstract

The Delayed-Response Problem

Cited by 86 publications

References 63 publications

Auditory delayed discriminations by the dolphin: Nonequivalence with delayed-matching performance

Auditory delayed discriminations by the dolphin: Nonequivalence with delayed-matching performance

Effects of proactive interference on rats’ continuous nonmatching-to-sample performance

Use of human visual attention cues by olive baboons (Papio anubis) in a competitive task.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About