Stimulus familiarization effect and the change effect in children's motor task behavior.

Cantor, Gordon N.

doi:10.1037/h0027007

Cited by 28 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 31 publications

(72 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, recent research by Bronstein, Dworkin, Bilder, and Wolkoff (1974) has called into question the potency of response-direction factors as controlling alternation in the rat, and still other research (e.g., Eisenberger, Myers, Sanders, & Shanab, 1970), which has controlled for these factors in a free-choice situation, has indicated that rats will also alternate on the basis of intramaze visual cues. These comparable findings for the rat and the cockroach accord well with a response-to-change (novelty) interpretation of alternation behavior (e.g., Dember, 1956;Fowler, 1965) and also with other, both human-and animal-related, phenomena (see Cantor, 1969;Fowler, 1967) which have em-phasized the role of prior exposure as a determinant of change. That is to say, a particular object, condition, or alternative can only provide a change relative to the antedating condition of stimulation to which the subject has recently been exposed.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Variables affecting alternation behavior in the cockroach,Blatta orientalis

Wilson

Fowler

1976

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To investigate alternation behavior in the cockroach as an invertebrate, three T-maze experiments were conducted assessing the effects of (a) intratrial (exposure) and intertrial (exposure to test) interval, (b)brightness similarity of the alternatives and response-direction factors, and (c) an initial free-choice vs. a varying number of forced-choice exposures. Alternation was enhanced with a long exposure on Trial l , a short interval between Triall and Trial 2 (test), greater dissimilarity (or discriminability) of the arm brightnesses and more frequent forced-choice exposures to an arm prior to test. These. results highlight the role of intramaze brightness cues as controlling alternation in the cockroach and accord well with a response-to-change interpretation of the phenomenon. In addition, they suggest that the alternation paradigm can be used effectively to assay short-term memory storage in neurologically simple organisms. Schultz, 1964). Apart from investigations employing rat and human subjects, however, the research with other organisms has served mainly to document the occurrence of alternation, for there has been little study of variables controlling the phenomenon.The purpose of the present study was to extend investigation of the phenomenon in lower organisms by assessing factors affecting alternation in the cockroach as an invertebrate. Such an investigation is particularly important when it is considered that recent research with the rat (e.g., Bronstein, Dworkin, Bilder, & Wolkoff, 1974;Douglas, 1966; Eisenberger, Myers, Sanders, & Shanab, 1970) has contested the basis on which alternation occurs. Using the rat literature as a guide, the present study investigated six variables treated two at a time in three independent experiments which were ordered so as to facilitate parameter selection. In succession, the three experiments assessed the effects of: (1) intratrial (exposure) and intertrial (exposure to test) interval, (2) brightness similarity of the choice alternatives and response-direction factors, and (3) an initial free-vs. a varying number of forced-choice exposures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Variables affecting alternation behavior in the cockroach,Blatta orientalis

Wilson

Fowler

1976

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Repeated presentations of a stimulus, however, also retard the acquisition of conditioned suppression to that stimulus if it is subsequently used as the CS in a conditioned suppression procedure (Anderson, Merrill, Dexter, & Alleman, 1968;Anderson, Wolf, & Sullivan, 1969;Carlton & Vogel, 1967;Leaf, Kayser, Andrews, Adkins, & Leaf, 1968;Lubow & Siebert, 1969;May, Tolman, & Schoenfeldt, 1967;Siegel & Domjan, 1971). The deleterious effects of unreinforced preexposure to the CS on the acquisition of conditioned suppression are similar to the latent inhibition phenomenon originally described by Lubow & Moore (1959) and subsequently demonstrated in a wide variety of conditioning preparations (see reviews by Cantor, 1969;Siegel, 1971 ).…”

supporting

confidence: 68%

Conditioned suppression following CS preexposure

Domjan

Siegel

1971

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present experiment evaluated both unconditioned and conditioned suppression in response to a preexposed CS in order to determine the extent to which these two processes contribute to the observation of "latent inhibition" in the conditioned suppression situation. Independent groups of rats received 0, 2, 5, 10, 25, or 50 CS preexposures prior to conditioned suppression training. Ss receiving more than 2 CS preexposures did not evidence unconditioned suppression in response to the CS, but nevertheless differed in acquisition of the conditioned suppression response, with more extensive preexposure associated with less conditioned suppression.

show abstract

“…However, a similar interpretation, which appeals to the concept of latent inhibition, rather than conditioned inhibition, may be offered. There is good evidence (see Cantor, 1969, for a review) that repeated presentations of a stimulus to a subject, prior to conditioning with this stimulus as CS, produces poorer conditioning with this stimulus than if subjects have no experience with this specific stimulus prior to conditioning. Lubow and Moore (1959) have labelled this effect "latent inhibition."…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditioned stimulus intensity and acquired alimentary aversions in the rat.

Nowlis¹

1974

Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three groups of rats were made ill following the ingestion of one of 3 intensities of salt taste and then were tested several times for aversions to each of the 3 intensities after this single training trial, yielding a 3 X 3 factorial design. Analysis of variance from this design revealed a significant positive effect on degree of aversion of both training intensity and testing intensity, and a significant interaction between these 2 intensity variables. The interaction was further analyzed into a component implying a multiplicative relationship between training intensity and testing intensity in determining strength of aversion, and into a component interpreted as indicating a decrement of the aversion when tested with intensities other than the training intensity. The results suggest a lawfulness of stimulus-response relationships comparable to those found in studies employing more typical conditioned responses. Previous conditioning studies, however, have demonstrated only the effect of conditioned stimulus intensity on "performance" (testing intensity effect) not on "learning" (training intensity effect).

show abstract

Stimulus familiarization effect and the change effect in children's motor task behavior.

Cited by 28 publications

References 31 publications

Variables affecting alternation behavior in the cockroach,Blatta orientalis

Variables affecting alternation behavior in the cockroach,Blatta orientalis

Conditioned suppression following CS preexposure

Conditioned stimulus intensity and acquired alimentary aversions in the rat.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About