A feature positive effect in conditioned suppression

Reberg, Douglas; Leclerc, Robert

doi:10.3758/bf03214069

Cited by 23 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, training with A+ and then testing with AX is predicted to result in the same loss in the strength of responding as training with AX+ and testing with A. In fact, demonstrations of the feature-positive effect have shown that a feature-positive discrimination is acquired more readily than a feature-negative discrimination (e.g., Reberg & LeClerc, 1977), while Brandon, Vogel, and Wagner (2000) have shown that the decrement in responding brought about by the transition from AX+ to A is greater than that from A+ to AX. Both of these results can be explained with the modification to configural theory that is currently being proposed.…”

Section: Asymmetries In Generalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A configural theory of attention and associative learning

George

Pearce

2012

Learn Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A formal account of the relationship between attention and associative learning is presented within the framework of a configural theory of discrimination learning. The account is based on a connectionist network in which the entire pattern of stimulation presented on a trial activates a configural unit that then enters into an association with the trial outcome. Attention is assumed to have two roles within this network. First, the salience of the stimuli at the input to the network can be increased if they are relevant to the occurrence of reinforcement and decreased if they are irrelevant. Second, the associability of configural units can increase on trials when the outcome is surprising and decrease when the outcome is not surprising.

show abstract

Section: Asymmetries In Generalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A configural theory of attention and associative learning

George

Pearce

2012

Learn Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The FPE has also been established with a variety of responses and reinforcers, and across a wide variety of subject populations, including rats (Reberg & LeClerc, 1977), pigeons (Jenkins & Sainsbury, 1969, 1970, monkeys (McCoy & Yanko, 1983;Pace, McCoy, & Nallan, 1980), human children (Sainsbury, 1971), and adults (Newman, Wolff, & Hearst, 1980). The wide generality of the phenomenon, as well as the demonstration of the FPE in humans, has caused speculation that the FPE may not reflect learned response tendencies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The ontogeny of the feature-positive effect in young chicks

Miller

McDougall

Zolman

1988

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The wide generality of the feature-positive effect (FPE) has caused speculation that the FPE may represent innate biases in the stimulus control of discriminative responding. There is little experimental evidence to date ragarding this possibility. In the present study, 1-or 4-day-old chicks were trained on a feature-positive (FP) or feature-negative (FN) discrimination with heat reinforcement. After the acquisition phase, these subjects received extinction training followed by a reacquisition phase. The FP performance was superior to the FN performance in both age groups. Extinction resulted in improved discrimination performance in both the FP and FN conditions. Unmasking ofFN learning by the extinction treatment suggests that the FPE represents a deficit in performance, rather than an inability to learn the FN task. These data demonstrate that adult-like performance on feature discriminations is evident as early as the first day post-hatch.Jenkins and Sainsbury (1969, 1970) found that the ability of pigeons to learn a visual discrimination between two stimulus displays was dependent on whether the distinguishing feature appeared on reinforced (S+ ) or nonreinforced (S-) trials. When the feature appeared on S+ trials (the feature-positive, or FP, condition), the discrimination was learned readily. However, when the feature appeared on S-trials (the feature-negative, or FN, condition), the discrimination was learned with difficulty, if at all. This superiority of FP performance relative to FN performance is referred to as the feature-positive effect (FPE). A more detailed analysis of response patterns during S+ trials indicates that FP subjects respond directly at the feature, whereas FN subjects direct response toward background cues present on both S+ and S-trials (referred to as the "common" element). Thus, this tendency to respond to or "track" the best predictor of reinforcement results in excellent FP discrimination performance and marginal FN performance.Recent evidence (Hearst, 1984(Hearst, , 1987 indicates that subjects manifesting poor FN performance may have actually learned the discrimination. Following initial FN discrimination training, subjects were given sessions of extinction in which responding to S+ or S-was not reinforced. Surprisingly, the subjects demonstrated a dramatic

show abstract

“…It should be noted, however, that this generalization pertains to terminal performance rather than to rate of learning. Reberg and LeClerc (1977) reported an FPE with a conditioned-suppression procedure; however, their subjects did show some learning in the FN situation. In the present experiment, strong FN learning appeared only in the escape condition when responses were probably controlled by the presence or absence of shock rather than by the accompanying discriminative stimuli.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The apparent generality of the FPE is limited in one sense because all of the above-mentioned studies were based on positive reinforcement paradigms. The only experiment that was concerned exclusively with the FPE and aversive control was one reported by Reberg and LeClerc (1977). Using a conditioned suppression procedure, they were able to demonstrate that suppression developed more readily when the stimuli predictive of shock contained the distinctive feature than in the reverse situation, where the feature predicted the absence of shock.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

Feature-positive and feature-negative discrimination learning maintained by negative reinforcement in rhesus monkeys

McCoy

Yanko

1983

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rhesus monkeys were trained to press panels to escape or avoid shock. Escape and avoidance training were combined factorially with feature-positive (FP) and feature-negative (FN) discriminations. In the FP situation, S+ trials were characterized by one red and two green panel displays and S-consisted of an all green panel array. In the FN arrangement, S+ and S-arrays were reversed. When compared properly, FP discriminations were learned more readily than FN discriminations in both escape and avoidance training conditions. Positive tracking was associated with FP discriminations, and feature avoidance characterized the FN tasks. These data suggest that in primates, feature responses (i.e., tracking behaviors) are more a function of the operant contingency than of the Pavlovian correlation.An interesting phenomenon in the area of discrimination learning, and one which has attracted increasing amounts of experimental attention, is the featurepositive effect, FPE, first described by Jenkins and Sainsbury (1969). Consider a go/no-go problem in which an animal is required to differentiate between a white stimulus and a white stimulus with a dot superimposed on it. Whether the subject learns the discrimination is apparently a function of which of these stimuli is designated as S+ and which is S-. If the animal is reinforced for responding to the stimulus containing the dot, or feature, but reinforcement is not available for responding to the blank white key, the condition is labeled feature positive (FP), and discrimination learning appears rapidly. However, in the reverse arrangement, in which the stimulus containing the feature appears exclusively as S-and the blank white stimulus appears as S+, learning is considerably more difficult. As a matter of fact, this feature-negative (FN) task is frequently characterized by a complete absence of learning. It is this asymmetry in learning FP discriminations relative to FN discriminations which constitutes the FPE.

show abstract

A feature positive effect in conditioned suppression

Cited by 23 publications

References 11 publications

A configural theory of attention and associative learning

A configural theory of attention and associative learning

The ontogeny of the feature-positive effect in young chicks

Feature-positive and feature-negative discrimination learning maintained by negative reinforcement in rhesus monkeys

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About