Latent inhibition and learned helplessness in children: Similarities and differences

Lubow, R. E.; Caspy, Tamir; Schnur, Paul

doi:10.1016/0022-0965(82)90044-3

Cited by 28 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, numerous experiments with nonmasked stimulus preexposures have failed to produce an LI effect (e.g., Graham & McLaren, 1998; for a review, see Lubow, 2005). Most importantly, studies that have explicitly compared masked and nonmasked conditions have obtained LI with the former but not with the latter (BraunsteinBercovitz & Lubow, 1998;De la Casa & Lubow, 2001;Ginton, Urca, & Lubow, 1975;Graham & McLaren, 1998;Lubow, Caspy, & Schnur, 1982). Notably, in all of these experiments, the masking task response was qualitatively different from the test task response.…”

Section: The Role Of the Masking Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intelligence and Cognitive Control

Chuderski

Nęcka²

2010

Handbook of Individual Differences in Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Role Of the Masking Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intelligence and Cognitive Control

Chuderski

Nęcka²

2010

Handbook of Individual Differences in Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Young children show the effect; older children and adults do not (except under special masking conditions, e.g. Lubow et al, 1982).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Latent inhibition: A developmental study

Kaniel

Lubow

1986

British J of Dev Psycho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two latent inhibition experiments were conducted with children aged between 4.6 and 11.8 years. Experiment I sampled a middle socio‐economic class population. Within each age, there were four experimental groups which varied in the number of pre‐exposures to the stimulus that was later used as the reinforced stimulus in a discrimination learning test. Latent inhibition, i.e. poorer learning in the group pre‐exposed to the stimulus as compared with the non‐pre‐exposed group, was found to decrease with age. In Expt 2, children from a low socio‐economic level were presented with a similar design. The results were the same as in Expt 1 except that latent inhibition decreased, as a function of age, at a slower rate. In addition, when the stimulus which is subsequently used as the negative item is pre‐exposed there is no significant effect on subsequent learning in the discrimination test. The data are discussed in terms of Kendler's multi‐stage model of development and Lubow's conditioned attention theory.

show abstract

“…Lubow, Caspy, and Schnur (1982) demonstrated a similar effect of US exposure in children using a visual discrimination task. By contrast, the current study showed no evidence that US exposure slowed learning; subjects in group US-Exposure actually averaged fewer Phase-2 errors than did subjects in group NoExposure, although this difference did not reach statistical signi®cance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Stimulus exposure effects in human associative learning

Myers

Oliver

Warren

et al. 2000

The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning that one cue (CS) predicts a second, salient cue (US) can often be slowed by prior exposure to one or both stimuli. In animals, CS±US learning is more strongly retarded following uncorrelated exposure to both CS and US than following exposure to the US alone. In this paper we present several studies showing a similar effect in humans, using a computer-based task. Experiments 1 and 2 used a between-groups design and demonstrated a strong CS/US exposure effect, whether or not the US was signalled by a neutral cue during exposure. Experiment 3 demonstrated similar effects using a within-subjects design. Overall, these results are consistent with several theoretical interpretations and suggest that uncorrelated CS/US exposure leads to a robust retardation of subsequent CS±US learning in humans.

show abstract

Latent inhibition and learned helplessness in children: Similarities and differences

Cited by 28 publications

References 28 publications

Intelligence and Cognitive Control

Intelligence and Cognitive Control

Latent inhibition: A developmental study

Stimulus exposure effects in human associative learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About