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

Abstract

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.

Serial pattern learning of temporal intervals

“…Another proposal is that animals learn associations between successive reinforcement magnitudes. For example, rats run more rapidly on a nonreinforced trial that is followed by reinforcement than one that is not (Capaldi & Miller, 1988), suggesting an association between nonreinforcement and the next reinforcement magnitude. Also, Self and Gaffan (1983) found that rats run more rapidly on the third trial ofa repeated ascending 0-1-10 series than a repeated descending 10-1-0 series, demonstrating that performance is not strictly determined by the most recent magnitude (1) or the average magnitude (3.67), and suggesting that performance is influenced by an association between a l-pellet reinforcement and the next reinforcement magnitude (10 or 0).…”

Replacement of event-generated memories of nonreinforcement with signal-generated memories of reinforcement during partial reinforcement training: Effect on resistance to extinction

“…The very substantial behavioral control exercised by event-generated memories has been demonstrated in partial reinforcement experiments (Capaldi, 1966(Capaldi, , 1971 crimination learning experiments (e.g., Capaldi, Berg, & Morris, 1975;Haggbloom, 1979Haggbloom, , 1981Haggbloom & Tillman, 1980), and recent serial learning investigations (e.g., Capaldi & Miller, 1988;Capaldi & Verry, 1981;Haggbloom, 1985). Haggbloom (1988) reported that the stimulus properties of signal-generated SN, and its capacity to regulate extinction behavior, and event-generated SN were essentially the same.…”

Numerical aspects of nonreinforcement: The same-phase nonreinforcement procedure

“…Given the findings of Capaldi and Miller (1988a), then, it is not unreasonable to suggest that when number cues associated with nonreinforcements are confounded with other cues, rats may nevertheless enumerate nonreinforcements. This being so, it follows that animals count when other means of solution are available and that counting reinforcing events may be employed to understand a wide array of learning phenomena (see, e.g., Capaldi, 1964Capaldi, , 1966Capaldi, , 1967Capaldi & Miller, 1988a, 1988b.…”

“…Such attributes may be retrieved on some subsequent trial provided the retrieval trial is sufficiently similar to the storage trial (e.g., Capaldi, 1971;Capaldi, Verry, Nawrocki, & Miller, 1984;Jobe, Mellgren, Feinberg, Littlejohn, & Rigby, 1977). Retrieved attributes become signals for the reinforcing event that occurs on the retrieval trial, and thus such attributes function as an anticipatory mechanism (Capaldi & Miller, 1988b;Capaldi, Nawrocki, & Verry, 1983). Vigor of responding is an increasing function of the magnitude of reinforcement signaled by the retrieved attributes.…”