Mechanisms for the cueing phenomenon: The addition of the cueing context to the training memory

Gordon, William C.; McCracken, Kathryn; Dess-Beech, Nancy; Mowrer, Robert R.

doi:10.1016/0023-9690(81)90018-7

Cited by 35 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These data appear to be inconsistent with those obtained by Gordon and his colleagues (Gordon et al, 1981;Mowrer & Gordon, 1983;Wittrup & Gordon, 1982), who have repeatedly demonstrated that a particular cuing treatment may overcome the detrimental effect of contextual changes (change of experimental room). Nevertheless, to be effective in Gordon's paradigms, the treatment must include two successive phases: the cuing treatment itself, consisting of the 15-sec placement of the animal in a box that is identical to a part of the training apparatus, followed by a second phase in which the animal is placed, for 3.5 min, in a holding cage in the room where the testing is to be run.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 83%

“…The paradox suggested by Riccio and his colleagues (Riccio & Ebner, 1981; seems to be based mainly upon the fact that performance disruptions resulting from a contextual change have been analyzed as a memory phenomenon, a case of forgetting (Gordon et al, 1981;Spear, 1978). The present experiments provide information about the contextual change effect that may be helpful in clarifying the situation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The principal aim of Experiment 2 was to examine whether the performance disruption resulting from a contextual change introduced soon after training could effectively be analyzed as a memory deficit, as suggested by Gordon et al (1981). If the performance deficit seen after contextual change and after a long training-to-test interval have the same sources, that is, retrieval failure, then these deficits should respond similarly to pretest treatments.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similar evidence comes from studies with animals, which exhibit poor performance when the environmental context is modified between training and testing. Such alterations of the context may concern external stimuli, change of experimental room (Gordon, McCracken, Dess-Beech, & Mowrer, 1981), slight modifications of the training apparatus (Perkins & Weyant, 1958;W. R. McAllister & D. E. McAllister, 1963), or internal stimuli, such as changes in the internal state of the animal following injections of drugs (cf.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Spear (1978) labeled the performance deficit resulting from contextual change as forgetting, according to his operational definition. Gordon et al (1981) went even further and included the contextual change effect under the general heading of forgetting. Gordon et al, performed a series of experiments aimed at demonstrating that, during cuing, the cuing context is added to the previously activated training memory.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Does contextual change determine long-term forgetting?

Gisquet-Verrier

Alexinsky

1986

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A series of experiments were run to test the hypothesis that "spontaneous forgetting" could result from subtle contextual changes. The first experiment demonstrated that when SpragueDawley male rats are trained in a runway alley with a food reinforcer, retention performance is dramatically affected by a change in the pattern of the walls of the training apparatus when testing takes place 1, 3, or 5 days following training and not after 1 week. Experiment 2 demonstrated that this performance deficit cannot be alleviated by any of the three selected cuing treatments, whereas "spontaneous forgetting" (resulting from a training-to-test interval of 14 days) can be. These data indicate that the detrimental effect of contextual change reduces over time, and that such an effect cannot be interpreted in terms of retrieval failure. These results lend strong support to the argument that the disruptive contextual change effect is basically different from the disruptive effect that results from an extended training-to-test interval.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 83%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Does contextual change determine long-term forgetting?

Gisquet-Verrier

Alexinsky

1986

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Stimulus attributes of reactivated memory: Alleviation of ontogenetic forgetting in rats is context specific

Richardson¹,

Riccio²,

McKenney³

1988

Developmental Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous studies have shown that ontogenetic forgetting (infantile amensia) can be alleviated by a number of different types of reminder treatment. The present study extends the information about the alleviation of infantile amnesia by examining the "content" of the reactivated memory. Toward this purpose, one attribute of memory (environmental context) was examined in rats tested either shortly after training (preamnesic) or after 1-week retention interval. For the latter, a reactivation treatment was used to reverse infantile amnesia. At both intervals, a context shift resulted in impaired performance of a conditioned fear response. These findings demonstrate that environment context is an important component of the originally encoded memory as well as the reactivated amnestic memory. The implications of these results for both the reactivation of memory and general memory processes are discussed.

show abstract

Prevalence of relapse of automatically maintained behavior resulting from context changes

Muething

Call

Ritchey

et al. 2021

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increases in behavior due to context changes are common and are known as instances of renewal. Clinically relevant examples from the literature highlighting renewal often include socially mediated problem behaviors. This report retrospectively analyzed data during context changes for individuals who engaged in problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement, to evaluate the prevalence of relapse. Problem behavior reemerged during changes both in the person implementing treatment (e.g., introducing a caregiver; 36%) and in the setting (e.g., introducing treatment in the home; 26%). Most prevalence studies report greatest relapse immediately following context changes but the highest level of relapse was observed after 5 sessions following person changes and no systematic pattern with setting changes. These patterns of relapse likely reflect differences in the function of settings and people relative to automatically reinforced behavior in the present study. Implications of relapse for treatments of problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement are discussed.

show abstract

Mechanisms for the cueing phenomenon: The addition of the cueing context to the training memory

Cited by 35 publications

References 11 publications

Does contextual change determine long-term forgetting?

Does contextual change determine long-term forgetting?

Stimulus attributes of reactivated memory: Alleviation of ontogenetic forgetting in rats is context specific

Prevalence of relapse of automatically maintained behavior resulting from context changes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About