Multiple hedonic memory: Memory for more than one hedonic event in rats

Capaldi, E. J.; Verry, Donna R.; Nawrocki, Timothy M.

doi:10.3758/bf03213721

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, the 2NR2N result is in accordance with the notion suggested by the multiple hedonic memory hypothesis (Capaldi & Verry, 1981;Capaldi et al, 1982). According to the multiple hedonic memory view, because the N-length cue is not reset on reinforced Trial 3, memory on each trial is as follows: On Trial 1, ST1 is produced; on Trial 2, it is SN1; on Trial 3, SN2; on Trial 4, SNZ + SR; on Trial 5, SN2 + SR + SNl.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Do rats remember all given hedonic events in any situation? Regarding this question, Capaldi and Verry (1981) and Capaldi et al (1982) suggest that rats group, or "chunk," hedonic events occurring with a short interval and treat them as being separate from hedonic events that may occur subsequently after a long interval. This means that rats would eset the mUl~iple memory of the prior events if a long interval was mserted after the reinforced trial.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, in serial pattern learning experiments, Capaldi and Verry (1981) proposed that rats could use mUlt£le memory SI + SNI in a 1-0-20 series and S20 + S 1 in a 20-0-0 series on Trial 3, and so rats could predict whether Trial 3 was 20 or O. SI and S20 stand for memory associated with 1 pellet and 20 pellets, respectively. The hypothesis that rats could use multiple memory was also confirmed by Capaldi, Verry, and Nawrocki (1982). In contrast to the sequential hypothesis, however, the multiple hedonic memory hypothesis suggested that stimulus modification of SN did not begin after a reinforced trial, but that the memory of reinforcement SRwas combined with the preceding N-Iength cue.…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reinforcement pattern learning: Do rats remember all prior events?

Yazawa

Fujita

1984

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments in a runway investigated how rats remember events occurring in temporal order. In Experiment 1, the reinforced trial was always the last (fifth) trial of the day for Group 4NR, the first trial for Group R4N, and the third trial for Group 2NR2N. For Group Nlrg, one ofTrials 2-5 was randomly reinforced. The running speeds for Group 2NR2N, an inverted V with its peak on Trial 3, were of special interest. An inverted V was also obtained for Group S-ITI (Experiment 2), which received the 2NR3N schedule at a 30-sec ITI, and for Group L-ITI (Experiment 3), which had a 30-min IT!. However, slow running on Trial 4 and not slow running on Trial 6 were demonstrated for Groups LINT (Experiment 2) and S-INT (Experiment 3), which received the same schedule as Groups S-ITI and L-ITI, except for a long or short interval inserted between Trials 3 and 4. These results suggest that rats remember all prior events occurring at an equal ITI whether the ITI is short or long, whereas they reset their memory when a longer or shorter interval elapses after the reinforced trial.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reinforcement pattern learning: Do rats remember all prior events?

Yazawa

Fujita

1984

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Correct anticipation is indicated by greater speed on reinforced than on nonreinforced runs. That rats, like people, simultaneously anticipate CUfrent events and remote events was clearly indicated by the following findings, reported by Capaldi, Nawrocki, and Verry (1983;see also Capaldi, Nawrocki, Miller, & Verry, 1986;Capaldi & Verry, 1981;Capaldi, Verry, & Nawrocki, 1982). Speeds on a target nonreinforced run were depressed, indicating correct anticipation of the current event, which was nonreinforcement.…”

mentioning

confidence: 71%

The rat’s simultaneous anticipation of remote events and current events can be sustained by event memories alone

Capaldi

Miller

1988

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After receiving events in a fixed order, A-B-C... , rats, like people, on being provided with A, may anticipate not only B, a current anticipation, but also C, a remote anticipation. In two experiments, we attempted to determine whether rats' remote anticipations are mediated by item cues (C elicited by A) or by position cues (C directly elicited by Position 3 cues, which generalize to Position 2). In Experiment 1, rats in a runway received two series of three trials, XNY and ZNN, each in irregular order each day. N signified nonreinforcement; X, Y, and Z signified three qualitatively different food reinforcements. The rats manifested a remote anticipation by running faster on Trial 2 in the XNY series than in the ZNN series. Since the series were presented irregularly, Trial 2 performance cannot be explained on a positional basis alone. It can be explained on an item basis, by assuming that the memory of the Trial 1 reinforcer became associated not only with the Trial 2 event, but with the Trial 3 event as well. Thus on Trial 2 the memory of X signaled Nand Y, whereas the memory ofZ signaled Nand N. Experiment 2 produced the same results, regardless of whether the XNY and ZNN series were presented in regular or irregular order. These results indicate that remote anticipations can be mediated by item associations. They offer no evidence that position associations can do the same, but they do not rule out that possibility.

show abstract

“…Associations between the ordinal position of an event and instrumental behavior may mediate some serial learning in anirnals (e.g., Bums, Wiley, & Payne, 1986;Terrace, 1986). Consider an experiment reported by Capaldi, Verry, and Nawrocki (1982). Rats were given two series of rewards in a runway each day in such a way that theorder in whichanimals ran theseries could not have reliablypredicted any particular series.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concurrent counting of two and three events in a serial anticipation paradigm

Burns

Sanders

1987

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats were runway trained with four different series of reward events for the purpose of determining if two different number cues (two and three) could be adequately employed to correctly anticipate a terminal nonreward in the series. In two of the series, two rewarded runs always occurred prior to terminal nonreward; one of these series always began with a nonrewarded run, NRRN, and the other did not, RRN. For two other series, three rewarded runs predicted terminal nonreward, NRRRN and RRRN. Each rat experienced each of the four series once a day for 26 days. The interval between runs within a series was about 20 sec, the interval between series was about 15 min, and the order in which the series were presented was randomized daily. Distinctive floor cues (smooth/black or rough/white, balanced over animals) signaled two-count and three-count series. Our animals correctly anticipated (ran slowly to) the terminal nonreward of all four series. On Day 27, an initial nonrewarded run was added to the two series that had been initiated by nonreward

show abstract

Multiple hedonic memory: Memory for more than one hedonic event in rats

Cited by 16 publications

References 13 publications

Reinforcement pattern learning: Do rats remember all prior events?

Reinforcement pattern learning: Do rats remember all prior events?

The rat’s simultaneous anticipation of remote events and current events can be sustained by event memories alone

Concurrent counting of two and three events in a serial anticipation paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About