TRANSFER OF DISCRIMINATION LEARNING IN WHITE RATS EFFECTS OF SOME PRECEDING TRAININGS ON THE FUNCTION OF THE RELEVANT CUE

MASANOBU SASAKI

doi:10.4992/psycholres1954.3.90

TRANSFER OF DISCRIMINATION LEARNING IN WHITE RATS

EFFECTS OF SOME PRECEDING TRAININGS ON THE FUNCTION OF THE RELEVANT CUE

MASANOBU SASAKI

Author information

JOURNAL FREE ACCESS

1961 Volume 3 Issue 2 Pages 90-101

DOI https://doi.org/10.4992/psycholres1954.3.90

Details

Published: 1961 Received: April 28, 1961 Available on J-STAGE: February 24, 2009 Accepted: - Advance online publication: - Revised: -
Correction information
Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: ABSTRACT Details: Wrong : Two experiments were conducted to investigate the influence of varying pre-ceding trainings on the rapidity of the aquisition of the relevant cue, i.e., on the effect of the reversal which was done in an early stage in the subsequent learning. The main findings were as follows.
1. Reversal retarded the learning in the control groups which received no pre-ceding training.
2. In the group which received a pre-ceding random reinforcement training for a short period using the same cue as that of the subsequent learning, the retarding effect of the reversal was larger than it was in the control groups.
3. There was no retarding effect of the reversal in groups which were given a random reinforcement training for a long period using the same cue as that of the subsequent learning.
4. In the group which received a pre-ceding successive discrimination learning using the same cue as that of the sub-sequent learning, the learning was faster in both the group without reversal and that with reversal.
5. In the group which received a pre-ceding successive discrimination learning using the cue different from that of the subsequent learning, the retarding effect was larger than it was in the control groups.
6. In the group which received a pre-ceding random reinforcement training using a cue different from those of the sub-sequent learning, the subsequent learning was slower than it was in the control groups in both the group without reversal and that with reversal.
7. In the group which received a pre-ceding learning using the same cue as that of the subsequent learning, the reversal learning after the completion of the sub-sequent learning was faster than it was in any other group.
8. In groups which received any pre-ceding learning, more VTEs tended to appear from the beginning of the sub-sequent learning than in the control groups, while in groups which received any preceding random reinforcement train-ing, less VTEs tended to appear.
These results represent different kinds of acquisition of the relevant cue and they cannot be explained in one principle for the present time. Each of the different concepts can be applied only to a part of the results. As a result of a preceding discrimination learning, the cue acquires distinctiveness, and any learning using that cue is facilitated. On the other hand, as a result of a preceding learning, the ob-serving responce is learned, which facilitates the acquisition of the relevant cue in any subsequent learning in that situation. A preceding random reinforcement training for a long period weakens the observing response, and so retards the acquisition of the relevant cue in that situation. When a preceding random reinforcement train-ing is given for a short period, perceptual differentiation takes place, and the acquisi-tion of the relevant cue is facilitated in the subsequent learning using the same cue.

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: CITATION Details: Wrong : BITTERMAN, M. E., Calvin, A. D., & ELAM, C. B. Perceptual differentiation in the course of non-differential reinforcement. 7. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1953, 46, 393-397,
BITTERMAN, M. E., & ELAM, C. B. Discrimination following varying amounts of non-differential reinforcement. Amer. 7. Psychol., 1954, 67, 133-137.
DOLLARD, J., & MILLER, N. E. Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950.
EDWARDS, A. L. Experimental design in psychological research. New York: Rinehart, 1950.
KORONAKOS, C., & ARNOLD, W. L. The forma-tion of learning sets in rats. 1. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1957, 50, 11-14.
KRECHEVSKY, I. ‘Hypotheses’ versus ‘chance’ in the pre-solution period in sensory discrimina-tion learning. Univ. Calif. Publ. Psychol., 1932, 6, 27-44.
LASHLEY, K. S. An examination of the ‘con-tinuity theory’ as applied to discriminative learning. 5. gen. Psychol., 1942, 26, 241-265.
LAWRENCE, D. H. Acquired distinctiveness of cues: I. Transfer between discriminations on the basis of familiarity with the stimulus.y. exp. Psychol., 1949, 39, 770-784.
LAWRENCE, D. H. Acquired distinctiveness of cues: II. Selective association in a constant stimulus situation. ,5'. exp. Psychol., 1950, 40, 175-188.
SIEGEL, S. Nonparainetric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
SPENCE, K. W. Continuous versus non-continuous interpretations of discrimination learning. Psychol. Rev., 1940, 47, 271-288.
Wyckoff, L. B., Jr. The role of observing responses in discrimination behavior. Psychol. Rev., 1952, 59, 437-442.

Right : BITTERMAN, M. E., Calvin, A. D., & ELAM, C. B. Perceptual differentiation in the course of nondifferential reinforcement. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1953, 46, 393-397.
BITTERMAN, M. E., & ELAM, C. B. Discrimination following varying amounts of non-differential reinforcement. Amer.J. Psychol., 1954, 67, 133-137.
DOLLARD, J., & MILLER, N. E. Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950.
EDWARDS, A. L. Experimental design in psychological research. New York: Rinehart, 1950.
KORONAKOS, C., & ARNOLD, W. L. The formation of learning sets in rats. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1957, 50, 11-14.
KRECHEVSKY, I. ‘Hypotheses’ versus ‘chance’ in the pre-solution period in sensory discrimination learning. Univ. Calif. Publ. Psychol., 1932, 6, 27-44.
LASHLEY, K. S. An examination of the ‘continuity theory’ as applied to discriminative learning. J. gen. Psychol., 1942, 26, 241-265.
LAWRENCE, D. H. Acquired distinctiveness of cues: I. Transfer between discriminations on the basis of familiarity with the stimulus. J. exp. Psychol., 1949, 39, 770-784.
LAWRENCE, D. H. Acquired distinctiveness of cues: II. Selective association in a constant stimulus situation. J. exp. Psychol., 1950, 40, 175-188.
SIEGEL, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
SPENCE, K. W. Continuous versus non-continuous interpretations of discrimination learning. Psychol. Rev., 1940, 47, 271-288.
Wyckoff, L. B., Jr. The role of observing responses in discrimination behavior. Psychol. Rev., 1952, 59, 437-442.

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: PDF FILE Details: -

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: TITLE Details: Wrong : TRANSFER OF DISCRIMINATION LEARNING IN WHITE RATS: EFFECTS OF SOME PRECEDING TRAININGS ON THE FUNCTION OF THE RELEVANT CUE
Right : TRANSFER OF DISCRIMINATION LEARNING IN WHITE RATS

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: SUBTITLE Details: Right : EFFECTS OF SOME PRECEDING TRAININGS ON THE FUNCTION OF THE RELEVANT CUE

Date of correction: February 24, 2009 Reason for correction: - Correction: CITATION Details: Wrong : BITTERMAN, M. E., Calvin, A. D., & ELAM, C. B. Perceptual differentiation in the course of nondifferential reinforcement. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1953, 46, 393-397.
BITTERMAN, M. E., & ELAM, C. B. Discrimination following varying amounts of non-differential reinforcement. Amer.J. Psychol., 1954, 67, 133-137.
DOLLARD, J., & MILLER, N. E. Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950.
EDWARDS, A. L. Experimental design in psychological research. New York: Rinehart, 1950.
KORONAKOS, C., & ARNOLD, W. L. The formation of learning sets in rats. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1957, 50, 11-14.
KRECHEVSKY, I. ‘Hypotheses’ versus ‘chance’ in the pre-solution period in sensory discrimination learning. Univ. Calif. Publ. Psychol., 1932, 6, 27-44.
LASHLEY, K. S. An examination of the ‘continuity theory’ as applied to discriminative learning. J. gen. Psychol., 1942, 26, 241-265.
LAWRENCE, D. H. Acquired distinctiveness of cues: I. Transfer between discriminations on the basis of familiarity with the stimulus. J. exp. Psychol., 1949, 39, 770-784.
LAWRENCE, D. H. Acquired distinctiveness of cues: II. Selective association in a constant stimulus situation. J. exp. Psychol., 1950, 40, 175-188.
SIEGEL, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
SPENCE, K. W. Continuous versus non-continuous interpretations of discrimination learning. Psychol. Rev., 1940, 47, 271-288.
Wyckoff, L. B., Jr. The role of observing responses in discrimination behavior. Psychol. Rev., 1952, 59, 437-442.

Right : BITTERMAN, M. E., Calvin, A. D., & ELAM, C. B. Perceptual differentiation in the course of nondifferential reinforcement. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1953, 46, 393-397.
BITTERMAN, M. E., & ELAM, C. B. Discrimination following varying amounts of non-differential reinforcement. Amer. J. Psychol., 1954, 67, 133-137.
DOLLARD, J., & MILLER, N. E. Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950.
EDWARDS, A. L. Experimental design in psychological research. New York: Rinehart, 1950.
KORONAKOS, C., & ARNOLD, W. L. The formation of learning sets in rats. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1957, 50, 11-14.
KRECHEVSKY, I. ‘Hypotheses’ versus ‘chance’ in the pre-solution period in sensory discrimination learning. Univ. Calif. Publ. Psychol., 1932, 6, 27-44.
LASHLEY, K. S. An examination of the ‘continuity theory’ as applied to discriminative learning. J. gen. Psychol., 1942, 26, 241-265.
LAWRENCE, D. H. Acquired distinctiveness of cues: I. Transfer between discriminations on the basis of familiarity with the stimulus. J. exp. Psychol., 1949, 39, 770-784.
LAWRENCE, D. H. Acquired distinctiveness of cues: II. Selective association in a constant stimulus situation. J. exp. Psychol., 1950, 40, 175-188.
SIEGEL, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
SPENCE, K. W. Continuous versus non-continuous interpretations of discrimination learning. Psychol. Rev., 1940, 47, 271-288.
Wyckoff, L. B., Jr. The role of observing responses in discrimination behavior. Psychol. Rev., 1952, 59, 437-442.

Corresponding author

Correction information

Register with J-STAGE for free!