1978
DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.85.4.321
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Model of conditioning incorporating the Rescorla-Wagner associative axiom, a dynamic attention process, and a catastrophe rule.

Abstract: A formal conditioning model is proposed that adds a dynamic attention rule and a novel response mapping rule to the Rescorla-Wagner associative axiom. This model retains the virtues of its predecessor and, in addition, accurately simulates many conditioning phenomena that are not encompassed by the original Rescorla-Wagner model: (a) The acquisition function is S-shaped, and abrupt shifts in responsiveness occur during acquisition and extinction; (b) reacquisition is characteristically more rapid than the init… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
107
1

Year Published

1978
1978
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 159 publications
(110 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
2
107
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The similar acquisition rate in the current study might lead one to conclude that 0.1 mg/kg nicotine is as salient as the higher nicotine doses (for discussions of effects of conditional stimulus salience on acquisition of Pavlovian conditioning, see Frey and Sears, 1978, Pavlov, 1927, Rescorla, 1988and Rescorla and Wagner, 1972. A non-salience explanation for the similar acquisition rate of the 3 groups (0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 mg/kg) involves the rich schedule of sucrose deliveries in nicotine sessions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The similar acquisition rate in the current study might lead one to conclude that 0.1 mg/kg nicotine is as salient as the higher nicotine doses (for discussions of effects of conditional stimulus salience on acquisition of Pavlovian conditioning, see Frey and Sears, 1978, Pavlov, 1927, Rescorla, 1988and Rescorla and Wagner, 1972. A non-salience explanation for the similar acquisition rate of the 3 groups (0.1, 0.2, and 0.4 mg/kg) involves the rich schedule of sucrose deliveries in nicotine sessions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This explicit rendering of model output into expected behavioral responding allows for more directly testable predictions. There are many possible response rules (e.g., Church & Kirkpatrick, 2001;Frey & Sears, 1978;Moore et al, 1986), but, for our purposes, a simple formalism will suffice. We assume that there is a reflexive mapping from US prediction to CR in the form of a thresholded leaky integrator.…”
Section: Model Specificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If we extend the baseline of the learning curve ( Figure 31.1, left) prior to the onset of the learning trials, two stable states are apparent; according to Frey and Sears (1978) hysteresis exists between learning and extinction curves cannot be explained otherwise. Different inflections in learning curves can be explained as a cusp bifurcation manifold (Guastello et aI., 2005a) as shown in Figure 31.1 (right).…”
Section: Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%