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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Psychological review 1938-03, Vol.45 (2), p.165-184 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & 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 |