1959
DOI: 10.1037/h0041345
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Response decrement in visual exploratory behavior.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

1965
1965
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the groups with longer detention (D 6 0 , D Joo, and D 600 ) , the observed increase of stepthrough latency or inhibition of exploration may be taken as describing the decline of the approach tendency of these subjects with repeated stimulus exposure (habituation, familiarity; see Ambrogi Lorenzini, Berlyne, 1950Berlyne, , 1955Rabedeau & Miles, 1959). This finding has been recently confirmed (Hirate et al, 1988) as a constant feature of albino rat behavior.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…In the groups with longer detention (D 6 0 , D Joo, and D 600 ) , the observed increase of stepthrough latency or inhibition of exploration may be taken as describing the decline of the approach tendency of these subjects with repeated stimulus exposure (habituation, familiarity; see Ambrogi Lorenzini, Berlyne, 1950Berlyne, , 1955Rabedeau & Miles, 1959). This finding has been recently confirmed (Hirate et al, 1988) as a constant feature of albino rat behavior.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…flashes increased with length of information deprivation (Jones, Wilkinson, & Braden, 1961). Frequency of visual exploration increased with time spent without exploring (Butler, 1957; see also Rabedeau & Miles, 1959; but see Haude & Ray, 1967). Wheel running (W. F. Hill, 1956) and activity in a stabilimeter (W. F. Hill, 1958) both increased with activity deprivation.…”
Section: Other Motivated Behaviorsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Research during the past 20 years has shown that responsiveness to, and for, many kinds of stimulation, besides the traditional examples of food and water, does indeed change with the degree of prior availability of the stimulation. Lengthening the interval between successive stimulus exposures has been found in rats, monkeys, and other species to increase the probability of such behaviors as visual exploration of novel stimuli (Butler, 1957;Rabedeau & Miles, 1959), locomotor exploration of novel stimuli (Berlyne, 1955;Fowler, 1965Fowler, , 1967Myers & Miller, 1954;Schneider & Gross, 1965), unrewarded manipulation (Forgays & Levin, 1961;Premack & Bahwell, 1959), and light-contingent responding (Forgays & Levin, 1961;Fox, 1962;Premack & Collier, 1962;Stewart, 1960, p. 319 188). Decrements in responding during sessions that follow deprivation have been reported for each of the above stimuli: visual exploration (Butler & Harlow, 1954;Rabedeau & Miles, 1959), locomotor exploration (Adlerstein & Fehrer, 1955;Berlyne, 1955;Glanzer, 1961;Montgomery, 1951Montgomery, , 1952bMontgomery & Monkman, 1955;Montgomery & Zimbardo, 1957;Welker, 1957;Williams & Kuchka, 1957), unrewarded manipulation (Forgays & Levin, 1961;Harlow, 1950;Kling, Horowitz, & Delhagen, 1956;McCall, 1965;Premack & Bahwell, 1959;Schoenfeld, Antonitis, & Bersh, 1950;Welker, 1956), light-contingent responding (Forgays & Levin, 1961;Fox, 1962;…”
Section: Deprivation-satiation Analyses Stimulus-satiation Theoriesmentioning
confidence: 99%