Experiential factors in the enhancement of saccharin intake after shifts to water

Hoyenga, Kermit T.; Hoyenga, Katharine Blick

doi:10.3758/bf03199244

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A related finding is the saccharin elation effect originally described by Gandelman and Trowill (1969) and most strongly demonstrated by Hoyenga and Hoyenga (1973;cf. Dube, Ashton, & Trowell, 1970).…”

Section: Negative Recency Effectmentioning

confidence: 62%

“…These studies cover a considerable range of saccharin concentrations, presentation methods, and other variables. Water is usually also available either simultaneously with or immediately after the saccharin, and water consumption generally goes down as saccharin consumption goes up (Domjan, 1976;Navarick & Strouthes, 1969), though not necessarily to the same degree (Hoyenga & Hoyenga, 1973). Where different concentrations have been used in the same experiment, there is evidence both for generalization and for some degree of specificity to the training concentration (Domjan & Gillan, 1976).…”

Section: Neophobiamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of mere exposure on preferences in nonhuman mammals.

Hill¹

1978

Psychological Bulletin

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is a review of the effects of simple exposure on preferences for lights, tastes, social companions, and miscellaneous other stimuli. In all categories of stimuli, substantial support is found for Zajonc's hypothesis that mere exposure increases preference, but all categories also show evidence of reduced preference following exposure. Which of these effects will dominate appears to depend on different factors for different categories of stimuli. However, most of the findings are consistent with a model in which exposure produces both a long-term increase in preference (more rapidly in some stimulus modalities than in others) and a short-term decrease in preference.How do our preferences among stimuli-that is to say, our likes, dislikes, tastes, and interests-develop and change? In attempting to answer this question, learning theorists have traditionally focused on paradigms that involve pairing of two stimuli, under such rubrics as classical conditioning, secondary reinforcement, and learned drive. Recently, however, there has been increasing interest in paradigms that involve simply the repeated presentation of a given stimulus without its being paired with anything in particular. The greatest impetus to this interest has come from the work of Zajonc and his collaborators on mere exposure, starting with Zajonc's (1968) study. Also relevant are Solomon and Corbit's (1974) work on the temporal dynamics of affect, the study of habituation (e.g., Groves & Thompson, 1970;Leibrecht, 1974), and various other lines of theory and research.

show abstract

Section: Negative Recency Effectmentioning

confidence: 62%

Section: Neophobiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of mere exposure on preferences in nonhuman mammals.

Hill¹

1978

Psychological Bulletin

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These elation effects have been demonstrated with access periods to saccharin ranging from 10 min per day, to 1 h per day, to continuous access (Ashton, Gandelman, & Trowill, 1970a;Dube, Ashton, & Trowill, 1970;Gandelrnan & Trowill, 1969;Hoyenga & Hoyenga, 1973;Pinel & Rovner, 1977). However, there have also been failures to demonstrate the effect (DiLollo & Meyer, 1970), and it has been argued that the elation effect is more reliable when animals are given continuous access to saccharin before the period of absence (Pinel & Rovner, 1977).…”

Section: Saccharin Elation Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incentive contrast: A review of behavioral changes following shifts in reward

Flaherty

1982

Animal Learning & Behavior

314

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature relevant to incentive contrast effects is reviewed, with emphasis on the data published since the reviews by Black (1968) and Dunham (1968). Contrary to the evidence available for the earlier reviews, the current literature indicates that positive contrast is a reliable phenomenon. Its occurrence is facilitated by use of a constant delay of reward, use of a long runway, or possibly by a shift while a negative contrast effect, resulting from a previous shift, is still present in the animals' behavior. Positive contrast also occurs in consummatory behavior when sucrose or saccharin solutions are shifted. Conditions that are ineffective in producing positive contrast are reviewed, as are the effects of numerous variables on both successive and simultaneous contrast. In addition, positive and negative contrast effects resulting from shifts in delay or percentage of reward, contrast resulting from shifts in sucrose, saccharin, or ethanol solutions, contrast in choice behavior, and transsituational contrast are reviewed. The relationship of the data to several theoretical interpretations of contrast is also considered.Interpretation of the behavior changes that occur when a familiar reward is replaced by a novel, usually less preferred, reward has played an important role in the theoretical analysis of animal learning. For example, Tolman (1932) cited the behavior of a monkey when the familiar reward of a banana was replaced by a piece of lettuce as evidence favoring his view that animals learn expectancies of particular rewards in a learning situation. The behavioral description was obtained in a delayed-response experiment by Tinklepaugh (1928): "She [the monkey] extends her hand to seize the food. But her hand drops to the floor without touching it. She looks at the lettuce but (unless very hungry) does not touch it. She looks under and around her. She picks the cup up and examines it thoroughly inside and out. She has on occasion turned toward observers present in the room and shrieked at them in apparent anger. After several seconds spent searching, she gives a glance toward the other cup, which she has been taught not to look into, and then walks off to a nearby window. The lettuce is left untouched on the floor" (p. 224).In addition to supporting Tolman's expectancy interpretation of animal learning, this description contains elements that continue to be relevant as possible explanations of the behavioral changes that Appreciation is due Alexandra Avdzej for assistance in library research and to HowardBecker, SusanChecke, and MaryFlaherty for their comments on the manuscript. Preparation for this article was aided by grants from the Rutgers Research Council. The author's mailing addressis: Psychology Department, Busch Campus, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey08903. occur subsequent to reward shifts, that is, the apparent presence of an emotional response elicited by the shift and the possibility that the animals search for the missing reward, given the opportunity.A rat study by Elli...

show abstract

“…Hoyenga and Hoyenga (1973) provided animals with continuous access to sodium saccharin solutions during the baseline period, and marked increases in saccharin selection were observed after each of three different periods of nonaccess. However, it was not clear in their study whether the marked increases in saccharin solutions were attributable to the continuous access or to some other feature of their methodology.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, as Hoyenga and Hoyenga (1973) have previously pointed out, the results of investigations into this question have been far from systematic. In two studies (Ashton, Gandelman, & Trowill, 1970;Gandelman & Trowill, 1969), the saccharin elation effect was demonstrated with a 3-day withdrawal interval, whereas Dube, Ashton, and Trowill (1970) found a significant effect with aI-day, but not a 3-day, interval.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%