Novelty of contextual cues in taste aversion learning
Tóm tắt
The purpose of this experiment was to test the theory of Lubow, Rifkin, and Alek (1976) concerning the effects of stimulus preexposure on later learning. This hypothesis predicts that conditioning will occur faster when either the stimulus or the testing environment is novel relative to the other than when the stimulus and the environment are equally novel or equally familiar. The theory was tested in a taste aversion conditioning paradigm in which groups of rats were presented with either the familiar (preexposed) solution or the novel nonpreexposed solution, in either the familiar or the novel environment. Conditioning was affected by the novelty of both the stimulus and the environment, with novel stimuli enhancing learning and novel environments retarding it. However, no interaction between stimulus and environmental novelty was evident, and thus Lubow’s hypothesis was not confirmed.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Barker, L. M. CS duration, amount, and concentration effects in conditioning taste aversions.Learning and Motivation, 1976,7, 265–273.
Bolles, R. C., &Rapp, H. M. Readiness to eat and drink: Effect of stimulus conditions.Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1965,60, 93–97.
Bond, N., &DiGiusto, E. Amount of solution drunk is a factor in the establishment of taste aversions.Animal Learning & Behavior, 1975,3, 81–84.
Hall, G. Exposure learning in animals.Psychological Bulletin, 1980,88, 535–550.
Kalat, J. W., &Rozin, P. “Learned safety” as a mechanism in long-delay taste aversion in the rat.Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1973,83, 198–207.
Kimble, G. A. Hilgard and Marquis’ conditioning and learning. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1961.
Lubow, R. E. Latent inhibition.Psychological Bulletin, 1973,79, 398–407.
Lubow, R. E., Rifkin, B., &Alek, M. The context effect: The relationship between stimulus preexposure and environmental preexposure determines subsequent learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1976,2, 38–47.
Mitchell, D., Kirschbaum, E. H., &Perry, R. L. Effects of neophobia and habituation on the poison-induced avoidance of exteroceptive stimuli in the rat.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1975,104, 47–55.
Moll, R. P. The effect of drive level on acquisition of the consummatory response.Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1959,52, 116–119.
Revusky, S. H., &Bedarf, E. W. Association of illness with prior ingestion of novel foods.Science, 1967,155, 219–220.
Siegel, S. Flavor preexposure and “learned safety.”Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1974,87, 1073–1082.
Tees, R. C. Perceptual development in mammals.Studies on the Development of Behavior and the Nervous System, 1976,3, 281–326.
Wagner, A. R. Priming in STM: An information-processing mechanism for self-generated or retrieval-generated depression in performance. In T. J. Tighe & R. N. Leaton (Eds.),Habituation. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1976.
Wagner, A. R. Expectancies and the priming of STM. In S. H. Hulse, H. Fowler, & W. K. Honig (Eds.),Cognitive processes in animal behavior. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1978.
Welkeb, W. I. Escape, exploratory, and food-seeking responses of rats in a novel situation.Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1959,52, 106–111.