scholarly journals Differential inhibition and stimulus generalization cannot account for value transfer in simultaneous discrimination learning by pigeons: Reply to Aitken

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 494-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Zentall ◽  
Brigette R. Dorrance ◽  
Tricia S. Clement



1962 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 166-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. McGaugh ◽  
Calvin W. Thomson


1974 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 447-452
Author(s):  
Jerome S. Cohen ◽  
Gabor A. Telegdy

Drive level affected reversal rather than non-reversal-shift learning during initial shift-discrimination trials. Animals under high water deprivation during the original simultaneous discrimination and reversal-shift discrimination made more initial (first trial-block) errors during reversal-shift than animals that were maintained on moderate deprivation during either or both discrimination tasks.



1973 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 463-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald B. Biederman

Latency and accuracy effects were studied with pigeons in a simultaneous discrimination-learning procedure which manipulated sequential randomness of stimulus events from trial to trial. Ss were trained to perform 2 color-discrimination problems with equal or unequal frequency of occurrence. It was found that non-random trial sequences had no effect on over-all acquisition as measured by latency and accuracy, but significant effects from remote trials were a function of the randomness of stimulus events. Performance characteristics on remote trials had significant local effects. In random program sequences, the 2 discrimination problems were learned independently of one another.



Author(s):  
Thomas R. Zentall ◽  
Lou M. Sherburne ◽  
Karen L. Roper ◽  
Philipp J. Kraemer






Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document