Learning Sets

The Pittsburgh Studies
  • Donald K. Routh

Abstract

This chapter is a broad review of the learning set (LS) paradigm as a research tool in comparative, developmental, and clinical psychology. Its principal purpose is to place in context the contributions to this area of research by George J. Wischner, his students, and his associates at the University of Pittsburgh. During the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, Wischner and his group were among the most active researchers using this learning paradigm with human subjects, including normal children, familial and brain-damaged mentally retarded children, aphasic and nonaphasic brain-damaged adults, and schizophrenic patients. Considered together, these studies have uncovered some new phenomena related to LS, have reported on the effects of several important procedural variations, and have established the sensitivity of LS measures to cognitive development in children, to neuropsychological impairment, and to psychopathology. A number of these studies now exist, however, only in the form of M.A. theses and Ph.D. dissertations or as unpublished manuscripts. Thus, a somewhat detailed review of their nature and content may serve the useful purpose of making them accessible to the scientific community.

Keywords

Schizophrenia Tate Sorting Tray Aphasia 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berman, P. W., Rane, N. G., Bahow, E., Age changes in children’s learning set with win-stay, lose-shift problems. Developmental Psychology, 1970, 2, 233–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bowes, A. E., Mastery of varying numbers of early problems as a factor in the formation of object-quality learning sets in two types of mentally retarded children. Unpublished M.S. thesis, University of Pittsburgh, 1959.Google Scholar
  3. Bowes, A. E., Problem difficulty as a factor in learning set formation by children. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1962.Google Scholar
  4. Bowman, R. E., Discrimination learning set performance under intermittent and secondary reinforcement. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1963, 56, 429–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braun, H. W., Patton, R. A., Barnes, H. W., Effects of electroshock convulsion upon the learning performance of monkeys: I. Object-quality discrimination learning. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1952, 45, 231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Colletti, R. B., Learning set formation in brain-damaged patients with and without aphasia as a function of problem difficulty. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1971.Google Scholar
  7. deHaan, H. J., Wischner, G. J., Three-dimensional objects versus projected color photographs of objects as stimuli in learning-set formation by retarded children. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1963, 56, 440–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ellis, N. R., Object-quality discrimination learning sets in mental defectives. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1958, 51, 79–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellis, N. R., Girardeau, E. L., Pryer, M. W., Analysis of learning sets in normal and severely defective humans. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1962, 55, 860–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fagen, J. W., Interproblem learning in ten-month-old infants. Child Development, 1977, 48, 786–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Filicki, E. S., Learning set formation in process and reactive schizophrenics as a function of paradigm difficulty. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1972.Google Scholar
  12. Gerben, M. J., A comparison of the effects of motor and verbal pretraining on the learning of a single Weigl discrimination by normal and retarded children. Unpublished M.S. thesis, University of Pittsburgh, 1964.Google Scholar
  13. Gerben, M. J., Presolution oddity learning set training as a variable in oddity discrimination learning and learning set formation by children. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1966.Google Scholar
  14. Gholson, B., The cognitive-developmental basis of human learning: Studies in hypothesis testing. New York: Academic Press, 1980.Google Scholar
  15. Girardeau, E. L., The formation of discrimination learning sets in Mongoloid and normal children. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1959, 52, 566–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hall, R. C., Object-quality discrimination learning-set formation by children with and without central organic involvement. Unpublished M.S. thesis, University of Pittsburgh, 1959.Google Scholar
  17. Hall, R. C., Factors influencing acquisition and extinction of an object quality discrimination learning set in mentally retarded children. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1963.Google Scholar
  18. Harlow, H. E., The formation of learning sets. Psychological Review, 1949, 56, 51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Harlow, H. E., Learning set and error factor theory. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science, Vol. 2. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959.Google Scholar
  20. Harlow, H. E, Harlow, M. K., Rueping, R. R., Mason, W. A., Performance of infant rhesus monkeys on discrimination learning, delayed response, and discrimination learning set. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1960, 53, 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Herman, L. M., Arbeit, W. R., Stimulus control and auditory discrimination learning sets in the bottle-nose dolphin. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1973, 19, 379–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaufman, M. E., Peterson, W. M., Acquisition of a learning set by normal and mentally retarded children. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1958, 51, 619–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kaufman, M. E., Peterson, W. M., Acquisition of a conditional discrimination learning-set by normal and mentally retarded children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1965, 69, 865–870.Google Scholar
  24. Koch, M. B., Meyer, D. R., Arelationship of mental age to learning-set formation in the preschool child. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1959, 52, 387–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leonard, C., Schneider, G. E., Gross, C. G., Performance on learning set and delayed-response tasks by tree shrews (Tupaia glis). Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1966, 62, 501–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Levin, G. R., Rapin, I., Costa, L. D., Tourk, L., Acquisition of a learning set by children with communication disorders. Journal of Communication Disorders, 1971, 4, 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Levine, M., A model of hypothesis behavior in discrimination learning set. Psychological Review, 1959, 66, 353–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Levine, M. (Ed.). A cognitive theory of learning: Research on hypothesis testing. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1975.Google Scholar
  29. Levine, M., Levinson, B., Harlow, H. E., Trials per problem as a variable in the acquisition of discrimination set. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1959, 52, 396–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Levinson, B., Reese, H. W., Patterns of discrimination learning set in preschool children, fifth graders, college freshmen, and the aged. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1967, 32 (Serial No. 115).Google Scholar
  31. Miles, R. C., Learning set formation in the squirrel monkey. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1957, 50, 356–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miller, N., E., Dollard, J. Social learning and imitation. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1941.Google Scholar
  33. Pascal, G. R., Zax, M., Double alternation performance as a measure of educability in cerebral palsied children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1955, 59, 658–665.Google Scholar
  34. Patterson, J. R., The effects of verbal pretraining on the learning of a single Weigl problem. Unpublished M.S. thesis, University of Pittsburgh, 1961.Google Scholar
  35. Pearson, D., Object-discrimination learning set acquisition in young cerebral palsied children in relation to tested and rated intelligence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1969, 33, 478–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Phillips, S., Levine, M., Probing for hypotheses with adults and children: Blank trials and introtacts. Journal of Experiment Psychology: General, 1975, 104, 327–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Prior, M. R., Chen, C. S., Learning set acquisition in autistic children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1975, 84, 701–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Reese, H. W., Discrimination learning sets in children. In L. Lipsitt C. C. Spiker (Eds.), Advances in child development and behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1963.Google Scholar
  39. Restie, E., Toward a quantitative description of learning set data. Psychological Review, 1958, 65, 77–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Restie, E, Andrews, M., Rokeach, M., Differences between open-and closed-minded subjects on learning-set and oddity problems. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 68, 648–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ricciardi, A. M., Treichler, F. R., Prior training influences on transfer to learning set by squirrel monkeys. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1970, 73, 314–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Roberts, K. E., The ability of preschool children to solve problems in which a simple principle of relationship is kept constant. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1932, 40, 118–133.Google Scholar
  43. Roberts, K. E., Learning in preschool and orphanage children. University of Iowa Studies in Child Welfare, 1933, 7, 3.Google Scholar
  44. Routh, D. K., Wischner, G. J., Effect of verbal pretraining and single.problem mastery on Weigl learning-set formation in children. Developmental Psychlogy, 1970, 2, 176–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schusterman, R. J., Transfer effects of successive discrimination-reversal training in chimpanzees. Science, 1962, 137, 422–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Slotnick, B. M., Katz, H. M., Olfactory learning-set formation in rats. Science, 1974, 185, 796–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stevenson, H. W., Swartz, J. D., Learning set in children as a function of intellectual level. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1958, 51, 755–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Weigl, E., On the psychology of so-called processes of abstraction. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1941, 36, 3–33. (Originally published 1927.)Google Scholar
  49. Wischner, G. J., O’Donnell, J. P., Concurrent learning-set formation in normal and retarded children. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1962, 55, 524–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wischner, G. J., Braun, H. W., Patton, R. A., Acquisition and long-term retention of an objectquality learning set by retarded children. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1962, 55, 518–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Donald K. Routh
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of IowaIowa CityUSA

Personalised recommendations