Visual Discrimination and Response Reversal Learning by Aphasic Subjects

1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 677-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert H. Brookshire

Nine aphasic and eight nonaphasic hospital patients were presented with a discrimination learning problem in which they had to learn differential motor responses to visual stimuli. Subjects first were reinforced for emitting response A in the presence of stimulus A, and response B in the presence of stimulus B. Then they were placed in a reversal situation in which they were reinforced for emitting response B in the presence of stimulus A, and response A in the presence of stimulus B. Results indicated that aphasic subjects had more difficulty than nonaphasies in both discrimination tasks. However, responses of most aphasic patients who did not learn the discrimination were not random but reflected strategies which resulted in substantial numbers of reinforcements. Aphasic subjects tended not to improve upon initial performance within treatment sessions, unless either stimuli or consequences for responses were changed. Clinical evidence is presented which indicates that subject impairments which appear in the experimental task also appear in subsequent clinical activities.

2000 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 142-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. D. Rogers ◽  
T. C. Andrews ◽  
P. M. Grasby ◽  
D. J. Brooks ◽  
T. W. Robbins

Much evidence suggests that lesions of the prefrontal cortex (PFC) produce marked impairments in the ability of subjects to shift cognitive set, as exemplified by performance of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST). However, studies with humans and experimental primates have suggested that damage to different regions of PFC induce dissociable impairments in two forms of shift learning implicit in the WCST (that is, extradimensional (ED) shift learning and reversal shift learning), with similar deficits also being apparent after damage to basal ganglia structures, especially the caudate nucleus. In this study, we used the same visual discrimination learning paradigm over multidimensional stimuli, and the H215O positron emission tomography (PET) technique, to examine regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) changes associated with these subcomponent processes of the WCST. In three conditions, subjects were scanned while acquiring visual discriminations involving either (i) the same stimulus dimension as preceding discriminations (intradimensional (ID) shifts); (ii) different stimulus dimensions from previous discriminations (ED shifts) or (iii) reversed stimulus-reward contingencies (reversal shifts). Additionally, subjects were scanned while responding to already learnt discriminations (‘performance baseline’). ED shift learning, relative to ID shift learning, produced activations in prefrontal regions, including, left anterior PFC and right dorsolateral PFC (BA 10 and 9/46). By contrast, reversal learning, relative to ID shift learning, produced activations of the left caudate nucleus. Additionally, compared to reversal and ID shift learning, ED shift learning was associated with relative deactivations in occipito-temporal pathways (for example, BA 17 and 37). These results confirm that, in the context of visual discrimination learning over multidimensional stimuli, the control of an acquired attentional bias or 'set', and the control of previously acquired stimulus-reinforcement associations, activate distinct cortical and subcortical neural stations. Moreover, we propose that the PFC may contribute to the control of attentional-set by modulating attentional processes mediated by occipito-temporal pathways.


1977 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 589-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Gaffan

In Experiment I, two monkeys solved a successive visual discrimination in which the four positive stimuli were the visual arrays RIM, LID, RAD and LAM while the four negative stimuli were RID, LIM, RAM and LAD. In Experiment II the same monkeys first learned a discrimination where the positive stimuli were pairs of letters (e.g. OB and AK) while the negative stimulus was the letter I; in a subsequent generalization test with all four possible pairings of the stimulus elements that had been positive during training (i.e. with OB, AK, OK and AB) the monkeys responded more strongly to the pairs that had been present in initial training. These results were discussed in relation to the theoretical analysis of configurational cues in animal discrimination learning and to the mechanism underlying visual discrimination of words by people.


1971 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 187-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Don White ◽  
Paul Spong ◽  
Norm Cameron ◽  
John Bradford

1992 ◽  
Vol 67 (6) ◽  
pp. 1447-1463 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Nakamura ◽  
A. Mikami ◽  
K. Kubota

1. The activity of single neurons was recorded extracellularly from the monkey amygdala while monkeys performed a visual discrimination task. The monkeys were trained to remember a visual stimulus during a delay period (0.5-3.0 s), to discriminate a new visual stimulus from the stimulus, and to release a lever when the new stimulus was presented. Colored photographs (human faces, monkeys, foods, and nonfood objects) or computer-generated two-dimensional shapes (a yellow triangle, a red circle, etc.) were used as visual stimuli. 2. The activity of 160 task-related neurons was studied. Of these, 144 (90%) responded to visual stimuli, 13 (8%) showed firing during the delay period, and 9 (6%) responded to the reward. 3. Task-related neurons were categorized according to the way in which various stimuli activated the neurons. First, to evaluate the proportion of all tested stimuli that elicited changes in activity of a neuron, selectivity index 1 (SI1) was employed. Second, to evaluate the ability of a neuron to discriminate a stimulus from another stimulus, SI2 was employed. On the basis of the calculated values of SI1 and SI2, neurons were classified as selective and nonselective. Most visual neurons were categorized as selective (131/144), and a few were characterized as nonselective (13/144). Neurons active during the delay period were also categorized as selective visual and delay neurons (6/13) and as nonselective delay neurons (7/13). 4. Responses of selective visual neurons had various temporal and stimulus-selective properties. Latencies ranged widely from 60 to 300 ms. Response durations also ranged widely from 20 to 870 ms. When the natures of the various effective stimuli were studied for each neuron, one-fourth of the responses of these neurons were considered to reflect some categorical aspect of the stimuli, such as human, monkey, food, or nonfood object. Furthermore, the responses of some neurons apparently reflected a certain behavioral significance of the stimuli that was separate from the task, such as the face of a particular person, smiling human faces, etc. 5. Nonselective visual neurons responded to a visual stimulus, regardless of its nature. They also responded in the absence of a visual stimulus when the monkey anticipated the appearance of the next stimulus. 6. Selective visual and delay neurons fired in response to particular stimuli and throughout the subsequent delay periods. Nonselective delay neurons increased their discharge rates gradually during the delay period, and the discharge rate decreased after the next stimulus was presented. 7. Task-related neurons were identified in six histologically distinct nuclei of the amygdala.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document