1934
DOI: 10.1037/h0075633
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Anticipatory responses in the maze.

Abstract: This sequence shall be designated as xxxxxxxl, the x's indicating that both paths of the designated section are correct. Thus, xxxxxxxr indicates that the first seven are "open" sections and the eighth has the correct path only on the right-hand side.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

1935
1935
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…
Hull's goal gradient hypothesis (3, p. 26) states that "... the goal reaction gets conditioned the most strongly to the stimuli preceding it, and the other reactions of the behavior sequence get conditioned to their stimuli progressively weaker as they are more remote {in time or space) 2 from the goal reaction." 8 The applicability of this hypothesis to spatially conditioned behavior sequences has been validated, in part at least, by previous experimental findings (1, 4,10,11). If the principle of a gradient of reinforcement holds in time as well as space, one would predict that a response which has been elicited recurrently at a particular interval of time would tend to be elicited with maximal strength at that interval, and would be elicited in a progressively weaker manner at other points more remote in time from that interval.
…”
mentioning
confidence: 66%
“…
Hull's goal gradient hypothesis (3, p. 26) states that "... the goal reaction gets conditioned the most strongly to the stimuli preceding it, and the other reactions of the behavior sequence get conditioned to their stimuli progressively weaker as they are more remote {in time or space) 2 from the goal reaction." 8 The applicability of this hypothesis to spatially conditioned behavior sequences has been validated, in part at least, by previous experimental findings (1, 4,10,11). If the principle of a gradient of reinforcement holds in time as well as space, one would predict that a response which has been elicited recurrently at a particular interval of time would tend to be elicited with maximal strength at that interval, and would be elicited in a progressively weaker manner at other points more remote in time from that interval.
…”
mentioning
confidence: 66%
“…In conclusion, the results of the first two experiments demonstrate that there is a generalization of conditioning (in other words, a transfer of training) from the reward device to the alley, which is dependent upon the previous association between the two. 9 A comparison of these results with the negative results of the sign-gestalt experiment, (12), suggests that the distinctiveness of the goal (or near goal) reaction is an important factor in determining the amount of this transfer. The third experiment suggests that the results of the first two would have been still more striking if the reactions in the two reward devices had been more dissimilar.…”
Section: Fig 3 Anticipatory Responses In the Alley On The Trials Imme...mentioning
confidence: 93%
“…This theoretical expectation is given convincing empirical support by the well established fact that even reactions near the goal, such as the last turn leading to food, show a strong tendency to intrude into the earlier portions of a maze sequence (8), (9). However, it is practically impossible for the complete goal reaction to take place without the actual presence of food.…”
mentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Under that of 'hypotheses' we think of practically all rat-runners in the world but for the final indignity of suggesting such a term as 'hypotheses' we must blame Krechevsky (S7). 10 And finally, under 'biases' we think of Dashiell (22), Bayroff (6), Dashiell and Bayroff (23), Schneirla (107), Yoshioka (149,150), Ballachey and Krechevsky (5), Spence (no), Spence and Shipley (in), Spragg (112,113), Buel (7,8), Ballachey and Buel (3,4), Buel and Ballachey (10,11), Ruch (100,101,102,103), Waters (139), and Witkin and Schneirla (146); and not even this completes the list.…”
Section: Fig IImentioning
confidence: 99%