SECONDARY REINFORCING EFFECTS OF PHYSICAL BLOCKING AND NONREWARDING UNDER MASSED CONDITIONS

SADAMI IKEDA

doi:10.4992/psycholres1954.6.29

SADAMI IKEDA

著者情報

ジャーナルフリー

1964 年 6 巻 1 号 p. 29-37

DOI https://doi.org/10.4992/psycholres1954.6.29

詳細

Published: 1964 Received: 1964/01/09 Available on J-STAGE: 2009/02/24 Accepted: - Advance online publication: - Revised: -
訂正情報
訂正日: 2009/02/24 訂正理由: - 訂正箇所: 論文抄録訂正内容: Wrong : The hypothesis that the inaccessible reward has the secondary reinforcement value for hungry rats was tested experimentally. In Exp. I, where 26 albino rats were run in the straight runway without reward, the hypothesis was not confirmed, whereas the alternative hypothesis that the inhibitory effect is produced by the cognition learning of the inaccessibility of food was found to fit. In Exp. II with 20 rats, the insertion of acquisition session prior to extinc-tion was found to make the original hypothesis tenable, though the inhibitory effect as was found in Exp. I was still detectable. However, the analysis of the randomness in response measures of individual rats did not detect a specific tendency as revealed by group averages.
Right : The hypothesis that the inaccessible reward has the secondary reinforcement value for hungry rats was tested experimentally. In Exp. I, where 26 albino rats were run in the straight runway without reward, the hypothesis was not confirmed, whereas the alternative hypothesis that the inhibitory effect is produced by the cognition learning of the inaccessibility of food was found to fit. In Exp. II with 20 rats, the insertion of acquisition session prior to extinction was found to make the original hypothesis tenable, though the inhibitory effect as was found in Exp. I was still detectable. However, the analysis of the randomness in response measures of individual rats did not detect a specific tendency as revealed by group averages.

訂正日: 2009/02/24 訂正理由: - 訂正箇所: 引用文献情報訂正内容: Wrong : AMSEL, A. 1958 The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situation. Psychol. Bull., 55, 102-119.
BLODGETT, H. 1924 The effect of the introduc-tion of reward upon the maze performance of rats. Univ. Calif. Publ. in Psychol., 4.
HULL, C.L. 1943 Principle of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century.
IKEDA, S. 1961 Experimental studies in frustra-tion: I. Extinction as a function of blocking situations and the distribution of trials. Proc. the 25th Annual Meeting of J.P.A., 172. (In Japanese.)
LAMBERT, W.W., & SOLMON, R.L. 1952 Extinc-tion of learning response as a function of dis-tance of blocked point from the goal. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 45, 269-279.
LAWSON, R., & Marx, M. H. 1958 A comparison of some presumed frustrating and secondary-reinforcing operations. ,7. comp. physiol. Psy-chal., 51, 742-746.
SCHLOSBERG, H., & PRATT, C.H. 1956 The secon-dary reward value of inaccessible food for hungry and satiated rats. ,7. comp. physiol. Psychol., 49, 149-152.
SHEFFIELD, V.F. 1950 Resistance to extinction as a function of the distribution of extinction trials. .7. exp. Psychol., 40, 305-313.
TOLMAN, E.C., & HONZIK, C.H. 1930 Degree of hunger reward and nonreward and maze learning in rats. Univ. Calif. Publ. in Psychol., 4.
WELKER, W.L. 1959 Escape, exploratory, and food-seeking responses of rats in a novel situa-tion. 3. comp. physiol. Psychol., 52, 106-111.

Right : AMSEL, A. 1958 The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situation. Psychol. Bull., 55, 102-119.
BLODGETT, H. 1924 The effect of the introduction of reward upon the maze performance of rats. Univ. Calif. Publ. in Psychol., 4.
HULL, C. L. 1943 Principle of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century.
IKEDA, S. 1961 Experimental studies in frustration: I. Extinction as a function of blocking situations and the distribution of trials. Proc. the 25th Annual Meeting of J.P.A., 172.(In Japanese.)
LAMBERT, W. W., & SOLMON, R.L. 1952 Extinction of learning response as a function of distance of blocked point from the goal. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 45, 269-279.
LAWSON, R., & Marx, M. H. 1958 A comparison of some presumed frustrating and secondary-reinforcing operations. J. comp. physiol. Psychat., 51, 742-746.
SCHLOSBERG, H., & PRATT, C. H. 1956 The secondary reward value of inaccessible food for hungry and satiated rats. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 49, 149-152.
SHEFFIELD, V. F. 1950 Resistance to extinction as a function of the distribution of extinction trials. J. exp. Psychol., 40, 305-313.
TOLMAN, E. C., & HONZIK, C. H. 1930 Degree of hunger reward and nonreward and maze learning in rats. Univ. Calif Publ. in Psychol., 4.
WELKER, W. L. 1959 Escape, exploratory, and food-seeking responses of rats in a novel situation. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 52, 106-111.

訂正日: 2009/02/24 訂正理由: - 訂正箇所: PDFファイル訂正内容: -

訂正日: 2009/02/24 訂正理由: - 訂正箇所: 引用文献情報訂正内容: Wrong : AMSEL, A. 1958 The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situation. Psychol. Bull., 55, 102-119.
BLODGETT, H. 1924 The effect of the introduction of reward upon the maze performance of rats. Univ. Calif. Publ. in Psychol., 4.
HULL, C. L. 1943 Principle of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century.
IKEDA, S. 1961 Experimental studies in frustration: I. Extinction as a function of blocking situations and the distribution of trials. Proc. the 25th Annual Meeting of J.P.A., 172.(In Japanese.)
LAMBERT, W. W., & SOLMON, R.L. 1952 Extinction of learning response as a function of distance of blocked point from the goal. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 45, 269-279.
LAWSON, R., & Marx, M. H. 1958 A comparison of some presumed frustrating and secondary-reinforcing operations. J. comp. physiol. Psychat., 51, 742-746.
SCHLOSBERG, H., & PRATT, C. H. 1956 The secondary reward value of inaccessible food for hungry and satiated rats. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 49, 149-152.
SHEFFIELD, V. F. 1950 Resistance to extinction as a function of the distribution of extinction trials. J. exp. Psychol., 40, 305-313.
TOLMAN, E. C., & HONZIK, C. H. 1930 Degree of hunger reward and nonreward and maze learning in rats. Univ. Calif Publ. in Psychol., 4.
WELKER, W. L. 1959 Escape, exploratory, and food-seeking responses of rats in a novel situation. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 52, 106-111.

Right : AMSEL, A. 1958 The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situation. Psychol. Bull., 55, 102-119.
BLODGETT, H. 1924 The effect of the introduction of reward upon the maze performance of rats. Univ. Calif. Publ. in Psychol., 4.
HULL, C. L. 1943 Principle of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century.
IKEDA, S. 1961 Experimental studies in frustration: I. Extinction as a function of blocking situations and the distribution of trials. Proc. the 25th Annual Meeting of J.P.A., 172.(In Japanese.)
LAMBERT, W. W., & SOLMON, R.L. 1952 Extinction of learning response as a function of distance of blocked point from the goal. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 45, 269-279.
LAWSON, R., & Marx, M. H. 1958 A comparison of some presumed frustrating and secondaryreinforcing operations. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 51, 742-746.
SCHLOSBERG, H., & PRATT, C. H. 1956 The secondary reward value of inaccessible food for hungry and satiated rats. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 49, 149-152.
SHEFFIELD, V. F. 1950 Resistance to extinction as a function of the distribution of extinction trials. J. exp. Psychol., 40, 305-313.
TOLMAN, E. C., & HONZIK, C. H. 1930 Degree of hunger reward and nonreward and maze learning in rats. Univ. Calif Publ. in Psychol., 4.
WELKER, W. L. 1959 Escape, exploratory, and food-seeking responses of rats in a novel situation. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 52, 106-111.

抄録

The hypothesis that the inaccessible reward has the secondary reinforcement value for hungry rats was tested experimentally. In Exp. I, where 26 albino rats were run in the straight runway without reward, the hypothesis was not confirmed, whereas the alternative hypothesis that the inhibitory effect is produced by the cognition learning of the inaccessibility of food was found to fit. In Exp. II with 20 rats, the insertion of acquisition session prior to extinction was found to make the original hypothesis tenable, though the inhibitory effect as was found in Exp. I was still detectable. However, the analysis of the randomness in response measures of individual rats did not detect a specific tendency as revealed by group averages.

責任著者(Corresponding author)

訂正情報

J-STAGEへの登録はこちら（無料）