Abstract
The subjects, 108 4-year-old children from two socioeconomic levels, were trained on a three-phase simultaneous discrimination task. In Phase 1, stimulus element A was reinforced; stimulus element B was held constant. In Phase 2, element B was reinforced on all trials; element A was available and reinforced on 100%, 75%, or 50% of the trials and held constant on the remaining trials. In Phase 3, the two elements were tested separately, conjunctively, and disjunctively. Lower socioeconomic subjects (a) performed well on element A and blocked element B if element A was available on 100% of the Phase 2 trials, (b) performed poorly on both elements A and B if element A was 75% available, and (c) performed poorly on element A and well on element B if element A was 50% available. Higher socioeconomic subjects performed well on both elements A and B under all conditions; however, predominant control passed from element A to element B after the availability of element A had been reduced.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Anderson, D. R. The effects of prior training on the incidental discriminative learning of children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1972, 14, 416–426.
Bresnahan, J. L. The effect of task and incentive on concept acquisition with children from two socioeconomic levels (Doctoral dissertation, Emory University, 1966). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1967, 27, 2886B. (University Microfilms No. 67-762).
Bresnahan, J. L., & Shapiro, M. M. Learning strategies in children from different socioeconomic levels. In H. W. Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 7). New York: Academic Press, 1972.
Crane, N. L., & Ross, L. E. A developmental study of attention to cue redundancy introduced following discrimination learning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1967, 5, 1–15.
Kamin, L. J. “Attention-like” processes in classical conditioning. In M. R. Jones (Ed.), Miami symposium on the prediction of behavior: Aversive stimulation. Miami: University of Miami Press, 1968.
Kendler, H. H., & Kendler, T. S. Vertical and horizontal processes in problem solving. Psychological Review, 1962, 69, 1–16.
Kendler, T. S., & Kendler, H. H. An ontogeny of optional shift behavior. Child Development, 1970, 41, 1–27.
Lyczak, R., & Tighe, T. Stimulus control in children under a blocking paradigm. Child Development, 1975, 46, 115–122.
Siegel, A. W. Variables affecting incidental learning in children. Child Development, 1968, 39, 957–968.
Siegel, A. W., & Stevenson, H. W. Incidental learning: A developmental study. Child Development, 1966, 37, 811–818.
Tighe, T. J., & Tighe, L. S. Overtraining and optional shift behavior in rats and children. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1966, 62, 49–54.
Trabasso, T., & Bower, G. H. What is learned. In T. Trabasso & G. H. Bower (Eds.), Attention in learning: Theory and research. New York: Wiley, 1968.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bresnahan, J.L., Smith, M.A. & Shapiro, M.M. Blocking in children from two socioeconomic levels. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 8, 72–75 (1976). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335083
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335083