The overlearning reversal effect in preschool children as a function of age

Cross, Henry A.; Tyer, Zita E.

doi:10.3758/bf03328014

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding is inconsistent with data presented by Cross & Tyer (1966) in which the Overlearning Reversal Effect was observed in the performance of young children solving a position discrimination problem. Why the quantity of single-object PRT had an effect on correct choices in discrimination reversal while the quantity of two-object acquisition trials did not produce an effect is not obvious.…”

contrasting

confidence: 99%

Analysis of discrimination reversal learning in children

Vaughter

1968

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies have repeatedly shown (Harlow, 1959) that the performance of infrahuman primates given single-object training trials with a nonrewarded object, the Negative (Neg) Stimulus, will, in subsequent two-choice discrimination trials, exceed that of animals given comparable training trials with a rewarded object, the Positive (Pos) Stimulus. This phenomenon has become known as the Moss-Harlow effect (Moss & Harlow, 1947), and the phenomenon lends support to a uniprocess, inhibition theory of discrimination learning. Employing the Moss-Harlow procedure (Moss & Harlow, 1947), observed the MossHarlow effect in the discrimination performance of younger, but not older children; i.e., the younger children's performance was better following training with the Neg stimulus while the older children's performance was better following training with the Pos stimulus.The Moss-Harlow effect has been observed in squirrel monkeys even when the single-object training trials were interposed between the acquisition and reversal phases of discrimination reversal (Cross & Brown, 1965;Cross, Fickling, Carpenter, & Brown, 1964). However, when Vaughter & Cross (1965) employed the prereversal discrimination procedure with five-year-old children, the Moss-Harlow effect was not observed. These children showed the greatest reversal learning following either training with both the Pos and Neg stimuli or with the Pos stimulus alone. Training with the Neg stimulus alone was no more beneficial than a control situation involving no single-object, prereversal training trials.The present study was designed to test for the occurrence of the Moss-Harlow effect in the performance of younger children when the prereversal discrimination procedure was used to test the effect. Both older and younger children were tested in order that an immediate comparison could be made; however, it was hypothesized that the older children's performance would replicate the findings of Vaughter & Cross (1965). In addition, the study was designed to investigate the effects of the amount of single-object prereversal training (PRT) and the amount of overlearning in the discrimination training upon discrimination reversal performance. The nature of the relationships between these variables might be of significance to any theory proposing that discrimination reversal does not involve ex tinction of one habit and acquisition to a new one (Lovejoy. 1966).Method. Thirty normal children, IS below five years of age with a mean age of three years and four months, and IS above five years of age with a mean age of five years and four months from the Lubbock Day School nurseries were employed as Ss.A modified WGTA for children was utilized; the apparatus has been described in detail elsewhere (Olson, Cross, & Vaughter, 1966). The essential features of the WGT A are a divided tabletop with a sliding three-well test tray and a one-way mirror assuring E a clear view of S. The stimuli consisted of 48 multidimensional or "junk" objects mounted upon uniform bases and randomly paired to co...

show abstract

contrasting

confidence: 99%

Analysis of discrimination reversal learning in children

Vaughter

1968

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…408 This suggests that overtraining may have an effect upon human discrimination performance, but the effect is apparently as subtle and difficult to reproduce with children as it is with animals (D'Amato & Jagoda, 1961). One tenable explanation of the problem is offered by Cross & Tyer (1966), who have suggested that ontogenetic level and perceptual experience are crucial factors in determining the presence of ORE. These investigators accordingly demonstrated the presence of ORE in younger but not in older nursery children.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of overtraining and delay on reversal and nonreversal shifts in kindergarten children

Viney

Varner

1967

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Indeed, many of the results obtained are in striking conflict. The experiments of Eimas (1966a), Gollin (1964), and Cross and Tyer (1966) are a case in point. In both the Eimas and Gollin studies it was found that SOT lends greater benefit to older children (second graders in Eimas' study, older nursery schoolers in Gollin's study) than to younger children (kindergarteners in Eimas' study, younger nursery schoolers in Gollin's study).…”

Section: Degrees Of Training Above a "Strict" Criterion (Id Shifts)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thirteen comparisons showed no difference between the SOT and "strict" criterion conditions: Stevenson and Weir (19S9); Suzuki (1961); Youniss and Furth (1964b), 2ID r (position without visual cues); Eimas (1966a), Experiment 1 with 2ID r (position); Tempone et al (1966), with 2ID r (simultaneous); Hochman (1966); Viney (1964); Bensberg (1958); Gollin (1964), with 4.5-5 year olds; Heal (1966), with retardates; Cross and Tyer (1966), with older nursery schoolers; Stevenson and Zigler (1957); and Youniss and Furth (1964a), with 3ID n . Stevenson and Zigler (1957) used normal children and retardates.…”

Section: Degrees Of Training Above a "Strict" Criterion (Id Shifts)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twenty-seven experiments have compared the ID-shift performance of groups trained to a "strict" criterion with that of groups given SOT. Of these, 19 found SOT facilitation: Marsh (1964); Sitterley and Capehart (1966); Eimas (1966a); Heal (1964), with normals; Furth and Youniss (1964); Eimas (1966b), Experiment 1 with 2ID r (visual); Ludvigson and Caul (1964); Walther (1962); Tempone, Capehart, Atwood, and Golding (1966), with 2ID r , successive; Zach (1964); Youniss and Furth (1965); Tighe and Tighe (1965); Youniss and Furth (1964a), with 3ID r ; Youniss and Furth (1964b), with 2ID r (visual) and 2ID r (position with irrelevant cues present); Cross and Tyer (1966), with younger nursery schoolers; Ohlrich and Ross (1966); Iwahara and Sugimura (1960); Sugimura (1965a);and Sugimura (1965b). Thirteen of these studies used children as subjects, one (Ohlrich & Ross, 1966) used retardates, and five used collegeage subjects.…”

Section: Degrees Of Training Above a "Strict" Criterion (Id Shifts)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Concept-shift and discrimination-reversal learning in humans.

Wolff¹

1967

Psychological Bulletin

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current studies of concept-shift and discrimination-reversal learning in humans are reviewed under 6 headings: (a) partial reinforcement during extradimensional shift, (b) number of response choices, (c) Age X Type of Shift, (d) intelligence, (e) degree of original training, and (f) verbal, perceptual, and attentional factors. In addition, several theoretical accounts of the shift process are considered and an effort is made to evaluate each of them in terms of the evidence presented in the review.

show abstract

The overlearning reversal effect in preschool children as a function of age

Cited by 3 publications

References 15 publications

Analysis of discrimination reversal learning in children

Analysis of discrimination reversal learning in children

The effects of overtraining and delay on reversal and nonreversal shifts in kindergarten children

Concept-shift and discrimination-reversal learning in humans.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About