Abstract
Replaced-stimulus transfer tests were used to assess the relative importance of S+ and S− without the confoundings typically associated with that procedure. Albino rats were given intercurrent training on a successive discrimination and a simultaneous discrimination. Then, two replaced-stimulus transfer tests were given. For one test, the S+ from the simultaneous discrimination was replaced by a stimulus from the successive discrimination. For the other test, the S− from the simultaneous discrimination was replaced by the other stimulus from the successive discrimination. More errors occurred when S− was replaced than when S+ was replaced. This finding showed that S− was the relatively more important stimulus.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bitterman, M. E., & McConnell, J. V. The role of set in successive discrimination. American Journal of Psychology, 1954, 67, 129–132.
Hall, G. Response strategies after overtraining in the jumping stand. Animal Learning & Behavior, 1973, 1, 157–160.
Harlow, H. F., & Hicks, L. H. Discrimination learning theory: Uniprocess vs. duoprocess. Psychological Review, 1957, 64, 104–109.
Hearst, E., Besley, S., & Farthing, G. W. Inhibition and the stimulus control of operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1970, 14, 373–409.
Jenkins, H. M. Generalization gradients and the concept of inhibition. In D. Mostofsky (Ed.), Stimulus generalization. Palo Alto, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1965.
Lawrence, D. H. Acquired distinctiveness of cues: I. Transfer between discriminations on the basis of familiarity with the stimulus. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1949, 39, 770–784.
Mackintosh, N. J. The psychology of animal learning. New York: Academic Press, 1974.
Mandler, J. M. Overtraining and the use of positive and negative stimuli in reversal and transfer. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1968, 66, 110–115.
Mandler, J. M. Two-choice discrimination learning using multiple stimuli. Learning and Motivation, 1970, 1, 261–266.
Mandler, J. M. Multiple stimulus discrimination learning, II. Effects of prior training. Psychonomic Science, 1971, 23, 195–196.
Mason, J. R., Stevens, D. A., Wixon, D. R., & Owens, M. P. Assessment of the relative importance of S+ and S− in rats using differential training on intercurrent discriminations. Learning and Motivation, 1980, 11, 49–60.
McGaugh, J. L., & Thomson, C. W. Facilitation of simultaneous discrimination with strychnine sulphate. Psychopharmacologica, 1962, 3, 166–172.
Mullins, G. P., & Winefield, A. H. The relative importance of responses to S+ and S− in simultaneous discrimination learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1979, 31, 329–338.
Rescorla, R. A. Conditioned inhibition of fear. In N. J. Mackintosh & W. K. Honig (Eds.), Fundamental issues in associative learning. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Dalhousie University Press, 1969.
Siegel, S. Overtraining and transfer processes. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1967, 64, 471–477.
Spence, K. W. The nature of the response in discrimination learning. Psychological Review, 1952, 59, 89–93.
Stevens, D. A., & Fechter, L. D. Relative strengths of approach and avoidance tendencies in discrimination learning of rats trained under two types of reinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 76, 489–491.
Stevens, D. A., & Wixon, D. R. Stimulus quality and assessment of the relative importance of S+ and S−. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1976, 2, 214–220.
Terrace, H. S. By-products of discrimination learning. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 5). New York: Academic Press, 1972.
Vaughter, R. M., Tyer, Z. E., & Halcomb, C. G. Discrimination performance in deprived and non-deprived rats as a function of pre-discrimination information. Psychonomic Science, 1966, 5, 199–200.
Wasserman, E. A., Franklin, S., & Hearst, E. Pavlovian appetitive contingencies and approach vs. withdrawal to conditioned stimuli in pigeons. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1974, 86, 616–627.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
A brief version of the present work was presented at the 19th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, San Antonio, Texas, November 9, 1978. The authors wish to thank N. J. Mackintosh for his useful criticism of an earlier version of this report.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stevens, D.A., Mason, J.R. & Wixon, D.R. Assessment of the relative importance of S+ and S− in rats, using intercurrent simultaneous and successive discriminations. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 17, 200–202 (1981). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03333712
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03333712