The effect of visual deprivation in the rat on transfer effects after form discrimination training

Abstract

In 3 experiments the performances of light-reared (LR) and dark-reared (DR) 90-day-old rats were compared on a variety of transfer tests following acquisition of 3 discriminations involving patterns of small squares (dots). Though no significant difference due to rearing condition was found in acquisition of those discriminations consisting of single lines of dots in various orientations, transfer tests did reveal subtle differences in the way LR and DR rats analyze contour information. Significant differences due to rearing were also observed on the acquisition of a complex dot pattern (gradient vs X) and, in spite of overtraining, on subsequent stimulus equivalence tests. Anomalous transfer effects were not observed in any of these test situations.

Generalization after form discrimination in light‐reared and dark‐reared rats

“…The results of the present study support and extend our previous findings in which the comparisons of visually experienced and inexperienced rats were made under aversive reinforcement and simultaneous presentation conditions and strengthen the idea of a common and selective mammalian response to environmental restriction which transcends differences among species (Tees, 1968(Tees, , 1976Tees, Bruinsma, & Midgley, 1978). In the 1st experiment the results indicated that visually naive animals possess not only the predisposition to isolate and unify a figure from its ground (Hebb, 1937) and the capacity to respond differentially and effectively to vertical, oblique, and horizontal line stimuli, but also the ability to generalize from a limited initial experience with such stimuli to rectangular shapes in different angular orientations.…”

“…On the basis of our evidence, we believe that the apparent dissociation between "permanent" effects on neuronal properties and "transient" effects on behavior after deprivation is somewhat of an illusion (Schwartz & Rothblat, 1980;Tees, 1976;Tees & Midgley, 1978). Although attempts to oversimplify the relation between single-unit characteristics such as motion sensitivity, binocularity, and orientational sensitivity, and patterndiscriminative capacities (Barlow, 1972) have helped to confuse the issue of the relative rates of neural and behavioral recovery, behavioral recovery may simply reflect the nature of the behavior and the test.…”

“…In the 1st experiment the results indicated that visually naive animals possess not only the predisposition to isolate and unify a figure from its ground (Hebb, 1937) and the capacity to respond differentially and effectively to vertical, oblique, and horizontal line stimuli, but also the ability to generalize from a limited initial experience with such stimuli to rectangular shapes in different angular orientations. Angular orientation of the stimuli was as salient a cue for DR as for LR rats, whether tested under shock motivation and simultaneous presentation conditions (e.g., Tees, 1968Tees, , 1979 or, as in the present investigation, under appetitive and successive presentations conditions.…”

Specifying the effect of visual deprivation on the rat's ability to recognize patterns.

“…On the other hand, the capacity to discriminate between patterns such as N vs. X, in which greater integration of visual information over space (and time) is required, clearly depends upon experience. The visually naive, DR rat learns more slowly and learns less about these collections of lines in different orientations than its LR control (Tees, 1972;Tees, Bruinsma, & Midgley, 1978;. Differences between these shapes involve relational properties between sets of linear elements, and it appears that the capacity to perceive even as basic a relationship between linear elements as contour separation is dependent on visual experience for its development (Tees, 1979).…”