Abstract
Pigeon subjects received Pavlovian conditioning with stimulus elements and were then tested with compounds of those elements. Experiments 1–3 used localized keylight elements and found no evidence for greater responding to the compound than to the elements. Experiments 4A–4D found evidence for greater second-order conditioning by a compound of two elements than by the elements themselves when the elements consisted of two diffuse stimuli or one diffuse stimulus and one localized keylight. No greater second-order conditioning resulted from a compound of two localized keylight elements, suggesting the possibility of perceptual interactions that reduce identification of the elements in the compound. Experiment 6 found evidence of summation when that interaction was reduced by sequential presentation. However, one attempt to capture this interaction in terms of configural conditioning (Pearce, 1987) failed to receive confirmation. These results suggest that the localized stimuli conventionally employed in autoshaping experiments may show such substantial perceptual interaction as to recommend against their routine use for studying conditioning in compounds.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bellingham, W. P., Gillette-Bellingham, K., &Kehoe, E. J. (1985). Summation and configuration in patterning schedules with the rat and rabbit.Animal Learning & Behavior,13, 152–164.
Forbes, D. T., &Holland, P. C. (1985). Spontaneous configuring in conditioned flavor aversion.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,11, 224–240.
Holland, P. C. (1983). “Occasion-setting” in Pavlovian feature positive discriminations. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, & A. R. Wagner (Eds.),Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol. 4. Discrimination processes (pp. 183–206). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Hull, C. L. (1943).Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Kehoe, E. J. (1986). Summation and configuration in conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,12, 186–195.
Kehoe, E. J., Horne, A. J., Horne, P. S., &Macrae, M. (1994). Summation and configuration between and within sensory modalities in classical conditioning of the rabbit.Animal Learning & Behavior,22, 19–26.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement.Psychological Review,82, 276–298.
Nairne, J. S., &Rescorla, R. A. (1981). Second-order conditioning with diffuse auditory reinforcers in the pigeon.Learning & Motivation,12, 65–91.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927).Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of the cerebral cortex (G. V. Anrep, Ed. and Trans.). London: Oxford University Press.
Pearce, J. M. (1987). A model of stimulus generalization for Pavlovian conditioning.Psychological Review,84, 61–73.
Pearce, J. M., Adam, J., Wilson, P. N., &Darby, R. J. (1992). Effects of discrimination training on responding during a compound conditioned stimulus.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,18, 379–386.
Pearce, J. M., &Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian learning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not unconditioned stimuli.Psychological Review,82, 532–552.
Pearce, J. M., &Redhead, E. S. (1993). The influence of an irrelevant stimulus on two discriminations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,19, 180–190.
Reberg, D. (1972). Compound tests for excitation in early acquisition and after prolonged extinction of conditioned suppression.Learning & Motivation,3, 246–258.
Rescorla, R. A. (1980).Pavlovian second-order conditioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rescorla, R. A. (1982). Effect of a stimulus intervening between CS and reinforcer in autoshaping.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,8, 131–141.
Rescorla, R. A. (1986). Facilitation and excitation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,12, 325–332.
Rescorla, R. A. (1989). Redundant treatments of neutral and excitatory stimuli in autoshaping.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,15, 212–223.
Rescorla, R. A., &Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.),Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory (pp. 64–99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Ricci, J. A. (1973). Key pecking under response-independent food presentation after long simple and compound stimuli.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,19, 509–516.
Rummelhart, D. C., &McClelland, J. L. (Eds.) (1986).Parallel distributed processing: Vol. 1. Foundations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Weiss, S. J. (1972). Stimulus compounding in free-operant and classical conditioning: A review and analysis.Psychological Bulletin,78, 189–208.
Whitlow, J. W., &Wagner, A. R. (1972). Negative patterning in classical conditioning: Summation of response tendencies to isolable and configural components.Psychonomic Science,27, 299–301.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant BNS-88-03514.
—Accepted by previous editor, Vincent M. LoLordo
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rescorla, R.A., Coldwell, S.E. Summation in autoshaping. Animal Learning & Behavior 23, 314–326 (1995). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198928
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198928