1969
DOI: 10.1037/h0026665
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spaced-trials partial reinforcement effect as a function of contrast.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
57
4

Year Published

1973
1973
2001
2001

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 111 publications
(64 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
3
57
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Macdonald and Toledo used a very small magnitude of water reinforcement. With small food reward, either a very weak or no PREE is obtained (Amsel, 1958;Gonzalez & Bitterman, 1969;Hulse, 1958;Roberts, 1969;Wagner, 1961;Yamaguchi & Sukenmune, 1963). The finding of no PREE by Macdonald and Toledo was based on the analysis of start and run times, not on speeds; no goal times were reported.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Macdonald and Toledo used a very small magnitude of water reinforcement. With small food reward, either a very weak or no PREE is obtained (Amsel, 1958;Gonzalez & Bitterman, 1969;Hulse, 1958;Roberts, 1969;Wagner, 1961;Yamaguchi & Sukenmune, 1963). The finding of no PREE by Macdonald and Toledo was based on the analysis of start and run times, not on speeds; no goal times were reported.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rats extinguish more rapidly after training with large as compared with small reward (Gonzalez & Bitterman 1969;Hulse 1958;Wagner 1961) -a special case of successive negative contrast -but resistance to extinction in goldfish increases with amount of reward (Gonzalez et al 1972); it was an early indication of this difference between rats and goldfish that prompted the Lowes experiment. Successive negative contrast is also a factor in the spacedtrials partial reinforcement effect found in rats trained with large reward (Gonzalez & Bitterman 1969;Hulse 1958;Wagner 1961). Goldfish (Schutz & Bitterman 1969) and African mouthbreeders (Longo & Bitterman 1960) fail to show the partial reinforcement effect in spaced trials.…”
Section: B6k6sy Laboratory Of Neurobiology University Of Hawaii Honmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both studies used an unconventional (classical conditioning) procedure with general activity as the response measure. A relatively short (mean 55 sec) intertrial interval was used, and Bitterman has argued that massed trials may allow the operation of nonassociative factors, such as sensory carry-over (Bitterman 1976;Gonzalez & Bitterman 1969). Moreover, both the recording technique used and the statistical analyses leave much to be desired.…”
Section: Experimental Studies Of Species Differencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The rust criticism is that while conditioned sensory traces may disrupt performance through generalization decrement in massed trials, there is no good evidence that these traces are durable enough to span long (e.g., 24-h) ITIs (e.g., Gonzalez & Bitterman, 1969). A sizable number of demonstrations of the SuNCE have been with 24-h ITIs, and recent work by Capaldi (1971Capaldi ( , 1972 has centered on hypothetical memory mechanisms, as opposed to sensory traces, that may bridge the ITI in spaced trials.…”
Section: Subjectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These conditions not only produced differential rates of extinction in varied reward groups, they also produced an inverse relation between the amount of consistent sucrose reward and resistance to extinction, a phenomenon analogous to the SuNCE (Gonzalez & Bitterman, 1969) and expected on the basis of generalization decrement. Other experiments examining sucrose reward magnitude effects on extinction have , conversely, failed to obtain the interaction (Ison & Rosen, 1968;Likely et al, 1971).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%