Putative inhibitory training of a stimulus makes it a facilitator: A within-subject comparison of visual and auditory stimuli in autoshaping

1Citations
Citations of this article
3Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Pigeons were trained with the A+, AB-, ABC+, AD- and ADE+ task where each of stimulus A and stimulus compounds ABC and ADE signalled food (positive trials), and each of stimulus compounds AB and AD signalled no food (negative trials). Stimuli A, B, C and E were small visual figures localised on a response key, and stimulus D was a white noise. Stimulus B was more effective than D as an inhibitor of responding to A during the training. After the birds learned to respond exclusively on the positive trials, effects of B and D on responding to C and E, respectively, were tested by comparing C, BC, E and DE trials. Stimulus B continuously facilitated responding to C on the BC test trials, but D's facilitative effect was observed only on the first DE test trial. Stimulus B also facilitated responding to E on BE test trials. Implications for the Rescorla-Wagner elemental model and the Pearce configural model of Pavlovian conditioning were discussed. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nakajima, S. (2000). Putative inhibitory training of a stimulus makes it a facilitator: A within-subject comparison of visual and auditory stimuli in autoshaping. Behavioural Processes, 48(3), 129–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-6357(99)00078-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free