Inhibition and Superconditioning

Superconditioning is said to occur when learning an association between a conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (US) is facilitated by pairing the CS with the US in the presence of a previously established conditioned inhibitor. Previous demonstrations of superconditioning have been criticized because their control conditions have allowed alternative interpretations. Using a within-subjects autoshaping procedure, the present study unambiguously demonstrated superconditioning. The results support the view that superconditioning is the symmetric opposite of blocking.

Panel-Touch Behavior of Horses Established by an Autoshaping Procedure

Panel-touch behavior of 3 geldings was successfully established by a response-termination type of autoshaping procedure. An omission or negative contingency introduced after the training of an animal, however, decreased the response rate to a near-zero level.

The Effects of Changes in the CS-US Interval during Compound Conditioning upon an Other Wise Blocked Element

Two experiments employed an autoshaping procedure with pigeons to examine the effects of changes in the inter-stimulus interval (ISI) upon the blocking phenomenon (Kamin, 1968). The introduction of a novel stimulus into a reinforced compound with the pretrained stimulus was accompanied by a decrease (Experiment I) or by increases (Experiment II) in the ISI. A decrease and a relatively small increase in the ISI attenuated the blocking of the added stimulus. The results were related to the major theories of stimulus selection and were interpreted to have added variations in the ISI to the list of operations during compound conditioning that cause “surprise” and, hence, attenuate blocking.