幼児の弁別移行学習と次元優位性

前田 健一

doi:10.4992/jjpsy.48.259

DISCRIMINATION SHIFT LEARNING AND DIMENSIONAL DOMINANCE IN YOUNG CHILDREN

KENICHI MAEDA

Author information

JOURNAL FREE ACCESS

1977 Volume 48 Issue 5 Pages 259-265

DOI https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.48.259

Details

Published: January 20, 1978 Received: April 10, 1976 Available on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010 Accepted: - Advance online publication: - Revised: -
Correction information
Date of correction: July 16, 2010 Reason for correction: - Correction: ABSTRACT Details: Wrong : A number of studies with the optional shift design found that the percentage of subjects who make optional reversal shifts increased with age. However, Smiley (1973) showed that the percentage of reversal subjects remained fairly constant at about 84% regardless of age when the dominant dimension was relevant. This finding may suggest that the nature of dimensional dominance, as defined in terms of relative cue similarity, is nonverbal and dimensional.
The present study was designed to obtain clearer evidence on the nature of dimensional dominance by changing the degree of dominance on only brightness dimension under reversal-nonreversal shift paradigm in a sizebrightness discrimination task.
A 2×2×2 factorial design was employed with Type of pretraining (perceptual or control), Degree of dominance of the brightness dimension (high or low), and Type of shift (reversal or nonreversal) as the factors. The subjects were 128 young children with the mean age of six years and three months. In perceptual pretraining condition, the subjects were required to make same-different judgments between a standard stimulus and comparison stimuli varying along both size and brightness dimension. In control condition, the subjects were given the Picture Arrangement subtest of WISC. Immediately after the pretraining or the control task, the subjects in each condition were given an initial discrimination task with high dominance (BH) or low dominance (BL) in a brightness-relevant dimension. After the subject made nine correct out of ten successive responses, a reversal or a nonreversal shift was given until the subjects reached the same criterion as in the initial discrimination.
The results were that (a) the subject given BH task learned the reversal shift significantly faster and tended to learn the nonreversal shift more slowly than those given BL task, and (b) dimensional dominance did not interact with type of pretraining. These results were interpreted to show that the nature of dimensional dominance was perceptual and dimensional and was in line with both attention and differentiation theories of discrimination learning. From the subproblem analysis on the mode of subjects' responses, it was suggested that the nature of dimensional dominance was attentional.
Right : This study was designed to assess the nature of dimensional dominance, as defined in terms of relative cue similarity, with 128 5- to 6-year-old children. They received either a perceptual pretraining or a control task, then performed a reversal or a non-reversal shift task for which the brightness dimension had either high dominance (BH) or low dominance (BL). The results were that (a) the subjects given BH task learned the reversal shift significantly faster and tended to learn the nonreversal shift more slowly than those given BL task, and (b) dimensional dominance did not interact with type of pretraining. These results were discussed in relation to perceptual and attentional theories of discrimination learning.

Abstract

This study was designed to assess the nature of dimensional dominance, as defined in terms of relative cue similarity, with 128 5- to 6-year-old children. They received either a perceptual pretraining or a control task, then performed a reversal or a non-reversal shift task for which the brightness dimension had either high dominance (BH) or low dominance (BL). The results were that (a) the subjects given BH task learned the reversal shift significantly faster and tended to learn the nonreversal shift more slowly than those given BL task, and (b) dimensional dominance did not interact with type of pretraining. These results were discussed in relation to perceptual and attentional theories of discrimination learning.

Corresponding author

Correction information

Register with J-STAGE for free!