Time-Based Matching/Oddity Task Reversal in Pigeons

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yael Klein ◽  
Robert G. Cook
Keyword(s):  
Oddity Task

Oddity and Discrimination Learning after Pretraining on a Nonrepeated Oddity Task

1983 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Sugimura
Keyword(s):  
Discrimination Learning ◽  
Discrimination Task ◽  
Kindergarten Children ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Oddity Task ◽  
Oddity Learning ◽  
High Level

128 kindergarten children learned an oddity task with no repeated stimuli until they reached one of the three criteria of 4/4, 8/8, and 8/8 + 20 correct responses, and then they were given either an oddity task with repeated stimuli or a discrimination task. With increasing numbers of pretraining trials, the repeated oddity learning became significantly easier but ease of the discrimination learning did not change significantly. These findings were interpreted as showing that attention to relational cues increased to a high level through learning the nonrepeated oddity task, whereas attention to absolute cues remained at almost the same level as in the control group with no pretraining.

scholarly journals T-type calcium channels in the orbitofrontal cortex mediate sensory integration as measured using a spontaneous oddity task in rats

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (7) ◽  
pp. 317-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendie N. Marks ◽  
Madeline E. Parker ◽  
Nadine K. Zabder ◽  
Quentin Greba ◽  
Terrance P. Snutch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Calcium Channels ◽  
Orbitofrontal Cortex ◽  
Sensory Integration ◽  
Oddity Task

Optimal decision rules for the oddity task

1994 ◽  
Vol 95 (5) ◽  
pp. 2944-2944
Author(s):  
Niek J. Versfeld ◽  
Huanping Dai ◽  
David M. Green
Keyword(s):  
Decision Rules ◽  
Optimal Decision ◽  
Oddity Task

Signal Detection Analysis of Auditory Sequence Discrimination by Children

1974 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. G. Doehring ◽  
Ruth A. Libman
Keyword(s):  
Signal Detection ◽  
Matching To Sample ◽  
Reading Problems ◽  
Decision Strategy ◽  
Third Sound ◽  
Oddity Task ◽  
Detection Analysis ◽  
First Sound ◽  
Signal Detection Analysis ◽  
Proportion Correct

A three-choice auditory oddity-task and two three-choice auditory matching-to-sample tasks in which the sample was presented first or last were presented to 96 normal Ss ranging in age from 7 to 25 yr. and to 36 children with reading problems aged 8 to 16 yr. Signal detection analysis was used to assess differences among positions of the odd or matching sound with respect to proportion correct (hit rate), decision strategy (false alarm rate), and underlying discriminability ( d'). On the matching-to-sample tasks there was a very consistent bias at all ages against responding to the sound most remote from the sample, even though the remote sounds were not less discriminable. On the oddity-task a bias against choosing the first sound and toward choosing the third sound occurred for younger children. Positional differences for children with reading problems were almost identical with those of normal Ss.

Effect of Identity versus Oddity Training on Novel Matching-to-Sample Responding after Naming

1992 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 307-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harrie Boelens
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Matching To Sample ◽  
Oddity Task

Identity and oddity matching-to-sample tasks were arranged for different groups of five-year-old children. The children were then taught to name stimuli A1, B1, A2, and B2, which had not occurred in the identity or oddity task. Two names were taught; one was used for two stimuli and the other name for the other two stimuli. Finally, matching-to-sample tests with A1, B1, A2, and B2 were carried out. These offered a choice between a comparison with the same name as the sample and a comparison with a name other than that of the sample. The children who had received identity training tended to choose the comparison with the same name as the sample. The children who had received oddity training tended to choose the comparison with the other name. The results obtained with the oddity group suggest that giving the same name to two stimuli is not sufficient for equivalence of these stimuli. The results obtained with both groups can be explained on the basis of pre-experimental abstraction processes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document