Effects of Training Level and Locus of N-R Transitions on Resistance to Discrimination

Haggbloom, Steven J.

doi:10.1007/bf03394690

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such evidence clearly suggests that brightness cues are not intense enough to seriously overshadow 0-pellet cues. However, it N-R transitions are introduced later in discrimination training, O-pellet cues will fail to acquire control over behavior (Haggbloom, 1980a). This finding suggests that the animal learns that the brightness cues are more valid predictors of reward than the O-pellet cues, and as a result the 0-pellet cues are overshadowed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serial learning, interitem associations, phrasing cues, interference, overshadowing, chunking, memory, and extinction

Capaldi

Verry

Nawrocki

et al. 1984

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments indicated that two approaches to serial learning are too extreme-the classical view that it consists only of interitem associations and various recent views that it involves no interitem associations. The novel assumption introduced here was that phrasing cues, normally conceptualized as merely segregating long series into smaller units or chunks, may also enter into associations with items, thereby reducing interitem interference and facilitating serial learning. It was found that one item could become a signal for another item, an interitem association, or be overshadowed by a phrasing cue, such as a brightness and temporal cue, also signaling that item. The items were ,045-g pellets. Rats traversed a runway for items arranged in ordered series, 14-7-3-1-0 pellets (Experiment 1) or 10-2-0-10 (Experiment 2), Complete tracking of, for example, the 10-2-0-10 series would consist of fastest running to 10 pellets and slowest running to 0 pellets. In both investigations, the interitem association overshadowed was that between 0 pellets and the subsequent rewarded item, 0-14 (Experiment 1) or 0-10 (Experiment 2). Either repetitions of the 14·7·3-1-0 subpattem (Experiment 1) or merely the terminall0·pellet item (Experiment 2) were phrased, both methods producing identical results. Overshadowing the O-pellet item produced superior serial learning, more rapid extinction, and, in Experiment 1, considerable elevation of responding when the brightness phrasing cue was introduced in extinction, an effect said to be conceptually identical to spontaneous recovery and one demonstrating directly that phrasing cues are in reality overshadowing cues. It was suggested that many effects attributed to forgetting may be due to unrecognized overshadowing of memory cues by phrasing cues, giving rise to exaggerated estimates of forgetting.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serial learning, interitem associations, phrasing cues, interference, overshadowing, chunking, memory, and extinction

Capaldi

Verry

Nawrocki

et al. 1984

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In that situation, whether SN stored in the context of one runway is retrieved on the subsequent trial in the other runway depends on whether or not the two runway brightness cues have been established as discriminative stimuli (Haggbloom, 1980). When N trials in one runway are followed by R trials in the other runway from the outset of training, and thus before the discrimination is learned, SNstored in one runway is retrieved in the other runway and gains considerable control over responding (Capaldi, Berg, & Morris, 1975;Haggbloom, 1978Haggbloom, , 1980Haggbloom & Tillman, 1980). On the other hand, if the discrimination is learned first, and only then are N trials in one runway followed by R trials in the other runway, SNgains very little control over behavior (Haggbloom, 1980).…”

Section: Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…When N trials in one runway are followed by R trials in the other runway from the outset of training, and thus before the discrimination is learned, SNstored in one runway is retrieved in the other runway and gains considerable control over responding (Capaldi, Berg, & Morris, 1975;Haggbloom, 1978Haggbloom, , 1980Haggbloom & Tillman, 1980). On the other hand, if the discrimination is learned first, and only then are N trials in one runway followed by R trials in the other runway, SNgains very little control over behavior (Haggbloom, 1980). Presumably, this is because retrieval of S" is poor in a context that has come to signal reinforcement.…”

Section: Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

Replacement of event-generated memories of nonreinforcement with signal-generated memories of reinforcement during partial reinforcement training: Effect on resistance to extinction

Haggbloom

Lovelace

Brewer

et al. 1990

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This familiar contextual change effect is usually attributed to retrieval failure: the altered context lacks sufficient information for subjects to retrieve the target memory. Retrieval failure has been extensively investigated in animal learning (e.g., Capaldi, 1971, Experiment 4; Capaldi, Miller, Alptekin, Barry, & Haggbloom, 1991;Capaldi, Nawrocki, Miller, & Verry, 1986;Haggbloom, 1980; Jobe, Mellgren, Feinberg, Littlejohn, & Rigby, 1977;Spear, 1978).We report two experiments concerned with another basis for contextual change effects, whereby the altered context can serve as a signal to retrieve a competing memory if that context has been regularly associated with some event. This sort of contextual change effect has been less extensively investigated, especially in appetitive instrumental learning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextual cues and the retrieval of competing memories of goal events

Haggbloom

Morris

1994

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Experiment 1, four groups of rats were initially trained on a discrimination which established a stimulus as a signal for reinforcement. That signal was then presented during subsequent partial reinforcement training in a way that could potentially interfere with retrieval of the memory of nonreinforcement (SN) on the preceding trial either because (1) the storage and retrieval contexts for SN were different (retrieval failure hypothesis), or (2) the memory of reinforcement produced by the signal acted as a competing memory (competing memory hypothesis). Experiment 1 supported the competing memory hypothesis. In Experiment 2, we investigated the effect of stimulus change on the capacity of the context to retrieve a competing memory of a temporally remote reinforcement event with which the context was strongly associated. Retrieval of a competing memory was impaired by differences between the storage and retrieval contexts in a manner analogous to the effect of context on retrieval of a reinforcement event memory from' an immediately preceding trial.Memory retrieval is impaired if the constellation of stimuli present during retrieval (the retrieval context) is sufficiently different from that present at the time of storage (the storage context). This familiar contextual change effect is usually attributed to retrieval failure: the altered context lacks sufficient information for subjects to retrieve the target memory. Retrieval failure has been extensively investigated in animal learning (e.g., Capaldi, 1971, Experiment 4; Capaldi, Miller, Alptekin, Barry, & Haggbloom, 1991;Capaldi, Nawrocki, Miller, & Verry, 1986;Haggbloom, 1980; Jobe, Mellgren, Feinberg, Littlejohn, & Rigby, 1977;Spear, 1978).We report two experiments concerned with another basis for contextual change effects, whereby the altered context can serve as a signal to retrieve a competing memory if that context has been regularly associated with some event. This sort of contextual change effect has been less extensively investigated, especially in appetitive instrumental learning. Bouton and his associates (see, e.g., Bouton, 1991), however, have shown that certain interference effects in classical conditioning occur when the context retrieves a competing conditioned stimulus-unconditioned stimulus (CS-US) association. Similarly, Spear et al. (1980) reported impaired active and passive avoidance when the test context retrieved a competing memory.Haggbloom (1988) and Haggbloom, Lovelace, Brewer, Levins, and Owens (1990) recently reported contextual change effects in appetitive instrumental learning which they too attributed to competing memories. In those experiments, the target memories were occasioned by reinforcement (R) and nonreinforcement (N), denoted here Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to S. J. as SR and SN, respectively. Retrieval of SR or SN on selected learning trials was inferred from resistance to extinction. To see how extinction provides this information, consider a conventional partial reinforcement situ...

show abstract

Effects of Training Level and Locus of N-R Transitions on Resistance to Discrimination

Cited by 11 publications

References 4 publications

Serial learning, interitem associations, phrasing cues, interference, overshadowing, chunking, memory, and extinction

Serial learning, interitem associations, phrasing cues, interference, overshadowing, chunking, memory, and extinction

Replacement of event-generated memories of nonreinforcement with signal-generated memories of reinforcement during partial reinforcement training: Effect on resistance to extinction

Contextual cues and the retrieval of competing memories of goal events

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About