Advertisement

Animal learning & behavior

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 339–350 | Cite as

Sequential processes in the generalization and transfer of stimulus control

  • James V. Couch
  • Jeremiah P. Collins
  • John W. Donahoe
Article
  • 127 Downloads

Abstract

Prior research indicated that a training sequence consisting of a negative stimulus followed by a positive stimulus constitutes the minimal condition for the production of postdiscrimination phenomena typically observed after training with random sequences of the discriminanda. The present experiments, employing multiple schedules with pigeon subjects, confirmed the earlier findings but indicated that they are restricted to procedures in which the reinforcing stimulus may acquire a discriminative function that competes with the control exerted by the nominal discriminanda. The sequences in which the discriminanda were presented did not differentially affect subsequent measures of generalization and transfer if the discriminative function of reinforcement were degraded either by introducing some reinforcers during the negative stimulus (Experiment 1) or by omitting some reinforcers during the positive stimulus (Experiment 2). It was concluded that the sequence in which the discriminanda are presented during discrimination training does not contribute fundamentally to the processes responsible for discrimination formation with random training sequences.

References

  1. Blough, D. S. Generalization gradient shape and summation in steady-state tests.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1969,12, 91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blough, D. S. Steady state data and a quantitative model of operant generalization and discrimination.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1975,104, 3–21.Google Scholar
  3. Capaldi, E. J. Partial reinforcement: An hypothesis of sequential effects.Psychological Review, 1966,73, 459–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Capaldi, E. J. Memory and learning: A sequential viewpoint. In W. K. Honig & P. H. R. James (Eds.),Animal memory. New York: Academic Press, 1971.Google Scholar
  5. Donahoe, J. W., McCroskery, J. H., &Richardson, W. K. Effects of context on the postdiscrimination gradient of stimulus generalization.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,84, 58–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dysart, J., Marx, M. H., McLean, J., &Nelson, J. A. Peak shift as a function of multiple schedules of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1974,22, 463–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ellis, W. R. Role of stimulus sequences in stimulus discrimination and stimulus generalization.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,83, 155–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Essock, S. M., &Blough, D. S. Effects of stimulus spacing on steady state gradients of inhibitory control.Animal Learning & Behavior, 1977,5, 174–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferster, C. B., &Skinner, B. F. Schedules of reinforcement. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall, 1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fleshler, M., &Hoffman, H. S. A progression for generating variable-interval schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1962,5, 529–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Guttman, N. Generalization gradients around stimuli associated with different reinforcement schedules.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959,58, 335–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hanson, H. M. Effects of discrimination training on stimulus generalization.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959,58, 321–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hinson, J. M., &Malone, J. C., Jr. Local contrast and maintained generalization.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1980,34, 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Honig, W. K., Thomas, D. R., &Guttman, N. Differential effects of continuous extinction and discrimination training on the generalization gradient.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959,58, 145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jenkins, H. M. Measurement of stimulus control during discriminative operant conditioning.Psychological Bulletin, 1965,64, 365–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kalish, H. I., &Guttman, N. Stimulus generalization after equal training on two stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1957,53, 139–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Malone, J. C., Jr., &Staddon, J. E. R. Contrast effects in maintained generalization gradients.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1973,19, 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Marcucella, H., &MacDonall, J. S. A molecular analysis of multiple schedule interactions: Negative contrast.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1977,28, 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nevin, J. A., &Shettleworth, S. J. An analysis of contrast effects in multiple schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1966,9, 305–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pierrel, R., &Blue, S. Antecedent reinforcement contingencies in the stimulus control of an auditory discrimination.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1967,10, 545–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Razlear, T. G., Pierrel-Sorrentino, R., &Brissey, C. Concurrent assessment of schedule and intensity control across successive discriminations.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1975,23, 247–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rilling, M. E., &Howard, R. C. The analysis of memory for signals and food in a successive discrimination. In M. L. Commons & J. A. Nevin (Eds.),Quantitative analyses of behavior: Discriminative properties of reinforcement schedules. Cambridge, Mass: Ballinger, 1981.Google Scholar
  23. Rosen, A. P., &Terrace, H. S. On the minimal conditions for the development of a peak-shift and inhibitory stimulus control.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1975,23, 385–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Skinner, B. F. The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1938.Google Scholar
  25. Skinner, B. F. Why I am not a cognitive psychologist.Behaviorism, 1977,5, 1–4.Google Scholar
  26. Terrace, H. S. Discrimination learning, the peak shift, and behavioral contrast.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1968,11, 727–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • James V. Couch
    • 1
  • Jeremiah P. Collins
    • 1
  • John W. Donahoe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Massachusetts-AmherstAmherst

Personalised recommendations