Choice point behavior in the white rat as influenced by spatial opposition and by preceding maze sequence.

Abstract

The work reported here is an outgrowth of a study in which one of the writers (1) undertook an analysis of the extent and nature of integration of the maze response. The method employed in the earlier study involved the use of a type of maze which will be referred to as a double-pattern maze r 1 one having two start sections, distinct in place, or in pattern, a constant middle section, and two end sections. At that point in the maze where the common middle section joins the two end sections a critical choice is demanded; a left turn, let us say, if the run began at start section one, a right turn if it began at start section two. Now it may be noted (fig. 1, Maze 1) that the central part of the maze preceding the choice point, C, is the same regardless of the kind of response to be made at C. Hence, in our earlier work, it was assumed that a correct response at C could be made only if the maze response were integrated from point C backward through the common section to the different start sections. Also it was thought that the possible extent of such linkage could be studied by changing the length and complexity of the central section.Our results, in the main, were negative. Using both alley and elevated mazes of several degrees of length and complexity, we did not obtain evidence of an ability in white rats to make an appropriate response at the choice point. One exception to this statement must be made. In one instance, using a small maze having-a central section 32" in length, a 16" straight path followed by a ninety degree turn and another 16" straight path leading to C, eight out of a group of twenty-five animals learned the maze. Learners required approximately 30 practice cycles, that is 30 runs on SiKEi and 30 on S2KE2. Similar findings were obtained by Wilson (20), who used a maze like the above in general principle in a study of reaction time and its intervening behavior variables. Wilson reported that his maze, with a central alley 32" in length was extremely difficult and that this difficulty increased with lengthening of the alley.To the present writers these findings seemed to indicate (1) that there is only a slight degree of integration of the component acts in the maze response, or (2) that integration, while occurring in the spatial maze, is for some reason inhibited in the double-pattern maze. At once suggesting itself as a possible cause of inhibition is the fact that, in the double-pattern maze, spatially opposed responses are demanded at one and the same place. Another suggestion might be that the difficulty of the maze results from the absence of differential space 1 More properly it should be called the double-pattern fixed position maze. If this is understood there should be no objection to our using the shorter term.

The sign of a symbol: a reply to Professor Allport.

“…The arrow to RT in II should be broken 3. Readers familiar with Hilgard and Marquis's concept of mediated stimulus equivalence (29, p. 229 ff.)…”

The role of response and place learning under alternating hunger and thirst drives.

“…As shown in Figure 1, the error score dropped to chance. Three possible interpretations seem reasonable: (1) The novelty of the starting place might have been disturbing; (2) the 1-ft. longitudinal shift might have changed the maze-room relationships enough to disrupt the habit; (3) if a response disposition for a given drive had developed, as well as a place disposition, the two could have been in conflict.…”

“…Investigators including Hull (5), Leeper (8), Rethlingshafer (9), Kendler (7), and others have presented contradictory interpretations of the ability of the rat to make differential responses in accordance with different drive states. On the other hand, Blodgett and McCutchan (1,2,3,4), Tolman, Ritchie, and Kalish (10,11), and others have been primarily concerned with place and response dispositions in the learning process of the rat. In the former cases the influence of factors such as extra-maze space and conflicting turning dispositions probably has received less consideration than might be desirable.…”

Place versus response learning in the simple T-maze.

“…Indeed we suppose that the rat would be about as thoroughly restricted in his use of exteroceptive cues as Honzik's blind, deaf, anosmic animals. 1 Group 2. Dome (response and place).…”