Abstract
Forty-eight rats were taught a simultaneous visual discrimination, S1+ vs S2−. Subsequently, they learned a second discrimination, involving one of the old stimuli and a new one. Half of them now learned S3+ vs S1−. The other half learned S2+ vs S3−. Retention of the second discrimination was tested one day or 32 days after training. The two different partial reversals resulted in proactive inhibition and to the same degree. It is argued that this result is inconsistent with the spontaneous recovery interpretation of proactive inhibition.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
BRIGGS, G. E. Acquisition, extinction, and recovery functions in retroactive inhibition. J. exp. Psychol., 1954, 47, 285–293.
GLEITMAN, H., & JUNG, L. Retention of a spatial discrimination as a function of proactive interference. Science, 1963, 142, 1683–1684.
KOPPENAAL, R. J. Time changes in the strengths of A-B, A-C lists; spontaneous recovery? J. verbal Learn. verbal Behav., 1963, 2, 310–319.
MAIER, S. F., & GLEITMAN, H. Proactive interference in rats. Psychon. Sci., 1967, 7, 25–26.
SLAMECKA, N. J. Supplementary report: A search for spontaneous recovery of verbal association. J. verbal Learn. verbal Behav., 1966, 5, 205–207.
UNDERWOOD, B. J. “Spontaneous” recovery of verbal associations. J. exp Psychol., 1948, 38, 429–439.
UNDERWOOD, B. J. Interference and forgetting. Psychol. Rev., 1957, 64, 49–60.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Note
1. This research was supported by United States Public Health Service Grant MH 10629-03 from the National Institute of Mental Health to Henry Gleitman.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maier, S.F., Allaway, T.A. & Gleitman, H. Proactive inhibition in rats after prior partial reversal: A critique of the spontaneous recovery hypothesis. Psychon Sci 9, 63–64 (1967). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330760
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330760