{"title":"阻塞和关联性改变。","authors":"Peter M Jones, Mark Haselgrove","doi":"10.1037/a0032254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Blocking of learning about a conditioned stimulus (the \"blocked\" cue) occurs when it is trained alongside an additional stimulus (the \"blocking\" cue) that has been previously presented with the outcome. A number of theories (e.g., N. J. Mackintosh. 1975a. A Theory of Attention: Variations in the Associability of Stimuli With Reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276-298; J. M. Pearce & G. Hall. 1980. A Model for Pavlovian Learning: Variation in the Effectiveness of Conditioned But Not Unconditioned Stimuli. Psychological Review, 87, 532-552) account for this attenuation in learning by proposing that attention paid to the blocked cue is restricted. In three experiments, we examined the associability of both blocked and blocking cues. In Experiment 1, rats were trained with a blocking protocol before being given a test discrimination composed of two components; one of these components required the use of the previously blocked cue as a discriminative stimulus, and the other component was soluble by using the blocking cue. To our surprise, the component that depended on the blocked cue was more readily solved than the component dependent on the blocking cue. The results of Experiments 2 and 3 suggest that this is due to the quantity of exposure that each stimulus received during initial training. Implications for theories of blocking, and more widely associative learning, are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":51088,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1037/a0032254","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blocking and associability change.\",\"authors\":\"Peter M Jones, Mark Haselgrove\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/a0032254\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Blocking of learning about a conditioned stimulus (the \\\"blocked\\\" cue) occurs when it is trained alongside an additional stimulus (the \\\"blocking\\\" cue) that has been previously presented with the outcome. A number of theories (e.g., N. J. Mackintosh. 1975a. A Theory of Attention: Variations in the Associability of Stimuli With Reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276-298; J. M. Pearce & G. Hall. 1980. A Model for Pavlovian Learning: Variation in the Effectiveness of Conditioned But Not Unconditioned Stimuli. Psychological Review, 87, 532-552) account for this attenuation in learning by proposing that attention paid to the blocked cue is restricted. In three experiments, we examined the associability of both blocked and blocking cues. In Experiment 1, rats were trained with a blocking protocol before being given a test discrimination composed of two components; one of these components required the use of the previously blocked cue as a discriminative stimulus, and the other component was soluble by using the blocking cue. To our surprise, the component that depended on the blocked cue was more readily solved than the component dependent on the blocking cue. The results of Experiments 2 and 3 suggest that this is due to the quantity of exposure that each stimulus received during initial training. Implications for theories of blocking, and more widely associative learning, are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51088,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1037/a0032254\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032254\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/5/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032254","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/5/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12
摘要
当一个条件刺激(“被阻断的”线索)与一个先前与结果一起出现的额外刺激(“被阻断的”线索)一起训练时,就会发生对条件刺激学习的阻断。一些理论(例如,n.j.麦金托什,1975a)。注意理论:刺激与强化的关联性变化。心理评论,82,276-298;J. M. Pearce & G. Hall, 1980。巴甫洛夫学习的一个模型:条件刺激而非非条件刺激的有效性变化。《心理学评论》(Psychological Review, 87, 532-552)通过提出对被阻断线索的注意力受到限制来解释学习过程中的这种衰减。在三个实验中,我们检验了被阻断线索和被阻断线索的联想性。在实验1中,大鼠先接受阻断方案的训练,然后给予由两部分组成的测试识别;其中一个成分需要使用先前被阻断的线索作为判别刺激,而另一个成分可以通过使用阻断线索来解决。令我们惊讶的是,依赖于阻塞线索的组件比依赖于阻塞线索的组件更容易解决。实验2和3的结果表明,这是由于在初始训练中每个刺激接受的暴露量。讨论了阻滞理论和更广泛的联想学习的含义。
Blocking of learning about a conditioned stimulus (the "blocked" cue) occurs when it is trained alongside an additional stimulus (the "blocking" cue) that has been previously presented with the outcome. A number of theories (e.g., N. J. Mackintosh. 1975a. A Theory of Attention: Variations in the Associability of Stimuli With Reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276-298; J. M. Pearce & G. Hall. 1980. A Model for Pavlovian Learning: Variation in the Effectiveness of Conditioned But Not Unconditioned Stimuli. Psychological Review, 87, 532-552) account for this attenuation in learning by proposing that attention paid to the blocked cue is restricted. In three experiments, we examined the associability of both blocked and blocking cues. In Experiment 1, rats were trained with a blocking protocol before being given a test discrimination composed of two components; one of these components required the use of the previously blocked cue as a discriminative stimulus, and the other component was soluble by using the blocking cue. To our surprise, the component that depended on the blocked cue was more readily solved than the component dependent on the blocking cue. The results of Experiments 2 and 3 suggest that this is due to the quantity of exposure that each stimulus received during initial training. Implications for theories of blocking, and more widely associative learning, are discussed.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition publishes experimental and theoretical studies concerning all aspects of animal behavior processes.