Constraints on Learning

Shettleworth, Sara J.

doi:10.1016/s0065-3454(08)60006-6

Cited by 322 publications

(185 citation statements)

References 104 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

180

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This paper showed that rats are prepared to learn some associations (e.g., taste and gastric illness) and less well prepared to learn others (e.g., light-sound combinations and gastric illness). In its day, this evidence was seen as both important and controversial, because it challenged the prevailing claims about the generality of the learning process [specifically the idea of equipotentiality (e.g., [2][3][4][5][6]]. We now have many examples of preparedness in learning (e.g., [5][6][7][8], although the terms used to describe this phenomenon have varied widely.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In its day, this evidence was seen as both important and controversial, because it challenged the prevailing claims about the generality of the learning process [specifically the idea of equipotentiality (e.g., [2][3][4][5][6]]. We now have many examples of preparedness in learning (e.g., [5][6][7][8], although the terms used to describe this phenomenon have varied widely. Investigators have called this "belongingness" (9), species-specific defense reactions (10), biological constraints (e.g., 5, 11), adaptive specializations (8), and "preparedness" (4,12).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Experimental evolution of prepared learning

Dunlap

Stephens

2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals learn some things more easily than others. To explain this so-called prepared learning, investigators commonly appeal to the evolutionary history of stimulus-consequence relationships experienced by a population or species. We offer a simple model that formalizes this long-standing hypothesis. The key variable in our model is the statistical reliability of the association between stimulus, action, and consequence. We use experimental evolution to test this hypothesis in populations of Drosophila. We systematically manipulated the reliability of two types of experience (the pairing of the aversive chemical quinine with color or with odor). Following 40 generations of evolution, data from learning assays support our basic prediction: Changes in learning abilities track the reliability of associations during a population's selective history. In populations where, for example, quinine-color pairings were unreliable but quinine-odor pairings were reliable, we find increased sensitivity to learning the quinine-odor experience and reduced sensitivity to learning quinine-color. To the best of our knowledge this is the first experimental demonstration of the evolution of prepared learning.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental evolution of prepared learning

Dunlap

Stephens

2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The possibility that special learning effects may occur with ecologically relevant CSs has been considered for some time. Investigators of biological constraints and adaptive specializations in learning have highlighted differences in how learning occurs under conditions that appear to be more ecologically valid than standard laboratory procedures (e.g., Hinde & StevensonHinde, 1973;Seligman, 1970;Seligman & Hager, 1972;Shettleworth, 1972). These issues have been discussed by Bolles (1970) and, later, by Fanselow and Lester (1988) in relation to avoidance learning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning with arbitrary versus ecological conditioned stimuli: Evidence from sexual conditioning

Domjan

Cusato

Krause

2004

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laboratory investigations of Pavlovian conditioning typically involve the association of an arbitrary conditioned stimulus (CS) with an unconditioned stimulus (US) that has no inherent relation to the CS. However, arbitrary CSs are unlikely to become conditioned outside the laboratory, because they do not occur often enough with the US to result in an association. Learning under natural circumstances is likely only if the CS has a preexisting relation to the US. Recent studies of sexual conditioning have shown that in contrast to an arbitrary CS, an ecologically relevant CS is resistant to blocking, extinction, and increases in the CS-US interval and results in sensitized responding and stronger secondorder conditioning. Although the mechanisms of these effects are not fully understood, these findings have shown that signature learning phenomena are significantly altered when the kinds of stimuli that are likely to become conditioned under natural circumstances are used. The implications of these findings for an ecological approach to the study of learning are discussed.

show abstract

“…Other studies have reported different behavioral outcomes with food vs. water reinforcement (Boakes, Poli, Lockwood, & Goodall, 1978;Bolles & Petrinovich, 1956;Petrinovich & Bolles, 1954;Shettleworth, 1972), often in situations which involve withdrawal of reinforcers (e.g., delay of reward, Logan & Spanier, 1970; the frustration effect, Levy & Seward, 1969; the partial reinforcement extinction effect, MacDonald & de Toledo, 1974). The present study adds positive behavioral contrast to the list.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Behavioral contrast and type of reward: Role of elicited response topography

Woodruff

1979

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Groups of pigeons were exposed to multiple variable-interval variable-interval and multiple variable-interval extinction schedules of either food or water reinforcement for keypecking. Discriminative stimuli associated with component schedules were located either on the operant key or on a second "signal" key. When the stimuli were projected on the operant key, positive contrast appeared during discrimination conditions with either food or water as the reinforcer. When the stimuli were projected on the signal key, overall responding to the operant and signal keys showed contrast with food, but negative induction with water as the reinforcer. In the latter condition, the signal for the variable-interval shcedule of water reinforcement elicited a variety of water-related behavior, only some of which was directed at the signal. Thus, the type of reward and location of discriminative stimuli interacted to determine the presence or absence of behavioral contrast effects. In large part, these results support and extend the autoshaping view of contrast.A good deal of research suggests that the phenomenon of positive behavioral contrast (Reynolds, 1961) may result from a combination of operant and respondent (or autoshaping, Brown & Jenkins, 1968) factors. Positive contrast appears during multipleschedule procedures when, for example, a multiple variable-interval variable-interval (mult VI VI) schedule is changed to multiple variable-interval extinction (mult VI EXT). As response rate declines in the EXT component, response rate often increases in the unchanged VI component, and this divergence of response rates is labeled positive contrast. According to the autoshaping view of contrast, a change from mult VI VI to mult VI EXT introduces a stimulusreinforcer contingency into the discrimination situation. The stimulus correlated with VI may engender elicited, or autoshaped responses, which sum with ongoing operant responses to increase response rate

show abstract

Constraints on Learning

Cited by 322 publications

References 104 publications

Experimental evolution of prepared learning

Experimental evolution of prepared learning

Learning with arbitrary versus ecological conditioned stimuli: Evidence from sexual conditioning

Behavioral contrast and type of reward: Role of elicited response topography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About