An eclectic view of some theories of learning

An examination of four theories of learning (trial-and-error, Gestalt insight, conditioning, and sign learning) for the purpose of pointing out unrecognized relationships among them. First, a close correspondence is shown between trial-and-error learning and insight, the differences being mainly a m...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Psychological review 1938-03, Vol.45 (2), p.165-184
1. Verfasser: Kellogg, W. N
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 184
container_issue 2
container_start_page 165
container_title Psychological review
container_volume 45
creator Kellogg, W. N
description An examination of four theories of learning (trial-and-error, Gestalt insight, conditioning, and sign learning) for the purpose of pointing out unrecognized relationships among them. First, a close correspondence is shown between trial-and-error learning and insight, the differences being mainly a matter of the complexity of the problem, the rapidity of the selection of the right response, and the number of symbolic processes involved. Second, conditioning and sign learning are found to be varieties of a common process. Third, either of these pairs could be related to the other, since trial-and-error is reducible to a series of conditionings. All forms take place in any complex learning process, but it is possible to classify separately the type of learning in which elimination or reduction of response is emphasized, and the type on which new stimulus response relationships are established.
doi_str_mv 10.1037/h0063376
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_614250708</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1291047585</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a311t-19430255cf0d27c20877bbb3f39c6022af1b6347ded0d0a0c41d4dbf8b1d713d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10E1Lw0AQBuBFFKxV8CcE9eAlOrMf2eyxFL-g4EXB27LZD5uSJnE3rfTfm1I9OpeB4eEdeAm5RLhDYPJ-CVAwJosjMkHFVI5c4jGZADCWUyU-TslZSisYB5WakHzWZt423g61zba1_866kKVu7bNh6btY-7Q_NN7Etm4_z8lJME3yF797St4fH97mz_ni9ellPlvkhiEOOSrOgAphAzgqLYVSyqqqWGDKFkCpCVgVjEvnHTgwYDk67qpQVugkMsem5OqQ28fua-PToFfdJrbjS10gpwIklCO6_g8hVQhcilKM6vagbOxSij7oPtZrE3caQe8b03-NjfTmQE1vdJ921sSxlcYnHf1Wc6GpxkKwHygVZys</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>614250708</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>An eclectic view of some theories of learning</title><source>EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><creator>Kellogg, W. N</creator><creatorcontrib>Kellogg, W. N</creatorcontrib><description>An examination of four theories of learning (trial-and-error, Gestalt insight, conditioning, and sign learning) for the purpose of pointing out unrecognized relationships among them. First, a close correspondence is shown between trial-and-error learning and insight, the differences being mainly a matter of the complexity of the problem, the rapidity of the selection of the right response, and the number of symbolic processes involved. Second, conditioning and sign learning are found to be varieties of a common process. Third, either of these pairs could be related to the other, since trial-and-error is reducible to a series of conditionings. All forms take place in any complex learning process, but it is possible to classify separately the type of learning in which elimination or reduction of response is emphasized, and the type on which new stimulus response relationships are established.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0033-295X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1471</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/h0063376</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, etc: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Human ; Learning Theory</subject><ispartof>Psychological review, 1938-03, Vol.45 (2), p.165-184</ispartof><rights>1938 unknown</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a311t-19430255cf0d27c20877bbb3f39c6022af1b6347ded0d0a0c41d4dbf8b1d713d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27869,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kellogg, W. N</creatorcontrib><title>An eclectic view of some theories of learning</title><title>Psychological review</title><description>An examination of four theories of learning (trial-and-error, Gestalt insight, conditioning, and sign learning) for the purpose of pointing out unrecognized relationships among them. First, a close correspondence is shown between trial-and-error learning and insight, the differences being mainly a matter of the complexity of the problem, the rapidity of the selection of the right response, and the number of symbolic processes involved. Second, conditioning and sign learning are found to be varieties of a common process. Third, either of these pairs could be related to the other, since trial-and-error is reducible to a series of conditionings. All forms take place in any complex learning process, but it is possible to classify separately the type of learning in which elimination or reduction of response is emphasized, and the type on which new stimulus response relationships are established.</description><subject>Human</subject><subject>Learning Theory</subject><issn>0033-295X</issn><issn>1939-1471</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1938</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNp10E1Lw0AQBuBFFKxV8CcE9eAlOrMf2eyxFL-g4EXB27LZD5uSJnE3rfTfm1I9OpeB4eEdeAm5RLhDYPJ-CVAwJosjMkHFVI5c4jGZADCWUyU-TslZSisYB5WakHzWZt423g61zba1_866kKVu7bNh6btY-7Q_NN7Etm4_z8lJME3yF797St4fH97mz_ni9ellPlvkhiEOOSrOgAphAzgqLYVSyqqqWGDKFkCpCVgVjEvnHTgwYDk67qpQVugkMsem5OqQ28fua-PToFfdJrbjS10gpwIklCO6_g8hVQhcilKM6vagbOxSij7oPtZrE3caQe8b03-NjfTmQE1vdJ921sSxlcYnHf1Wc6GpxkKwHygVZys</recordid><startdate>193803</startdate><enddate>193803</enddate><creator>Kellogg, W. N</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><general>American Psychological Association, etc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>EOLOZ</scope><scope>FKUCP</scope><scope>IOIBA</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>193803</creationdate><title>An eclectic view of some theories of learning</title><author>Kellogg, W. N</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a311t-19430255cf0d27c20877bbb3f39c6022af1b6347ded0d0a0c41d4dbf8b1d713d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1938</creationdate><topic>Human</topic><topic>Learning Theory</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kellogg, W. N</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 01</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 04</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 29</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><jtitle>Psychological review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kellogg, W. N</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>An eclectic view of some theories of learning</atitle><jtitle>Psychological review</jtitle><date>1938-03</date><risdate>1938</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>165</spage><epage>184</epage><pages>165-184</pages><issn>0033-295X</issn><eissn>1939-1471</eissn><abstract>An examination of four theories of learning (trial-and-error, Gestalt insight, conditioning, and sign learning) for the purpose of pointing out unrecognized relationships among them. First, a close correspondence is shown between trial-and-error learning and insight, the differences being mainly a matter of the complexity of the problem, the rapidity of the selection of the right response, and the number of symbolic processes involved. Second, conditioning and sign learning are found to be varieties of a common process. Third, either of these pairs could be related to the other, since trial-and-error is reducible to a series of conditionings. All forms take place in any complex learning process, but it is possible to classify separately the type of learning in which elimination or reduction of response is emphasized, and the type on which new stimulus response relationships are established.</abstract><cop>Washington, etc</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><doi>10.1037/h0063376</doi><tpages>20</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0033-295X
ispartof Psychological review, 1938-03, Vol.45 (2), p.165-184
issn 0033-295X
1939-1471
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_614250708
source EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES; Periodicals Index Online
subjects Human
Learning Theory
title An eclectic view of some theories of learning
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T00%3A34%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=An%20eclectic%20view%20of%20some%20theories%20of%20learning&rft.jtitle=Psychological%20review&rft.au=Kellogg,%20W.%20N&rft.date=1938-03&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=165&rft.epage=184&rft.pages=165-184&rft.issn=0033-295X&rft.eissn=1939-1471&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/h0063376&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1291047585%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=614250708&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true