Perceptual Learning in Maze Discriminations

1991 ◽  
Vol 43 (4b) ◽  
pp. 389-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.B. Trobalon ◽  
J. Sansa ◽  
V. D. Chamizo ◽  
N.J. Mackintos

In Experiment 1, rats were trained on a discrimination between rubber- and sandpaper-covered arms of a maze after one group had been pre-exposed to these intra-maze cues. Pre-exposure facilitated subsequent discrimination learning, unless the discrimination was made easier by adding further discriminative stimuli, when it now significantly retarded learning. In Experiment 2, rats were trained on an extra-maze spatial discrimination, again after one group, but not another, had been pre-exposed to the extra-maze landmarks. Here too, pre-exposure facilitated subsequent discrimination learning, unless the discrimination was made substantially easier by arranging that the two arms between which rats had to choose were always separated by 135°. The results of both experiments can be explained by supposing that perceptual learning depends on the presence of features common to S+ and S-.

1981 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-202
Author(s):  
Barry S. Anton ◽  
Nina I. Player ◽  
Thomas L. Bennett

Albino rats were pre-exposed to stimuli in an otherwise visually sparse environment, with visibility and opportunity to manipulate the forms controlled during rearing. Analysis indicated that pre-exposing animals to stimuli which provided either tactual-kinesthetic feedback or highly visible forms significantly facilitated subsequent discrimination learning. The findings question the adequacy of either an attention-getting or tactual-kinesthetic feedback to account for differences in transfer effects in studies using two- and three-dimensional forms. It is suggested that the visibility of the forms and the opportunity to inspect the forms during pre-exposure is the important variable in studies of this type.


Neuroreport ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 329-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
René Garcia ◽  
Rose Marie Vouimba ◽  
Robert Jaffard

2012 ◽  
Vol 65 (6) ◽  
pp. 1123-1138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel de Zilva ◽  
Chris J. Mitchell

Human participants received exposure to similar visual stimuli (AW and BW) that shared a common feature (W). Experiment 1 demonstrated that subsequent discrimination between AW and BW was more accurate when the two stimuli were preexposed on an intermixed schedule (AW, BW, AW, BW…) than when they were preexposed on a blocked schedule (AW, AW…BW, BW…): the intermixed–blocked effect. Furthermore, memory for the unique features of the stimuli (A and B) was better when the stimuli were preexposed on an intermixed schedule than when they were preexposed on a blocked schedule. Conversely, memory for the common features of the stimuli (W) was better when the stimuli were preexposed on a blocked schedule than when they were preexposed on an intermixed schedule. Experiment 2 again demonstrated the intermixed–blocked effect, but participants were preexposed to the stimuli in such a way that the temporal spacing between exposures to the unique features was equated between schedules. Memory for the unique and common features was similar to that found in Experiment 1. These findings support the proposal that perceptual learning depends on a mechanism that enhances memory for the unique features and reduces memory for common features.


2009 ◽  
Vol 1281 ◽  
pp. 47-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrin Walter-Walsh ◽  
Thomas Weiss ◽  
Dorothee Spohn ◽  
Ferenc Torma ◽  
Wolfgang H.R. Miltner

2007 ◽  
Vol 427 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Weiss ◽  
Katrin Walter ◽  
Dorothee Spohn ◽  
Maria Richter ◽  
Ferenc Torma ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document