CONDITIONAL DISCRIMINATION LEARNING: A CRITIQUE AND AMPLIFICATION

Carter and Werner recently reviewed the literature on conditional discrimination learning by pigeons, which consists of studies of matching‐to‐sample and oddity‐from‐sample. They also discussed three models of such learning: the “multiple‐rule” model (learning of stimulus‐specific relations), the “c...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 1980-03, Vol.33 (2), p.291-298
Hauptverfasser: Schrier, Allan M., Thompson, Claudia R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 298
container_issue 2
container_start_page 291
container_title Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
container_volume 33
creator Schrier, Allan M.
Thompson, Claudia R.
description Carter and Werner recently reviewed the literature on conditional discrimination learning by pigeons, which consists of studies of matching‐to‐sample and oddity‐from‐sample. They also discussed three models of such learning: the “multiple‐rule” model (learning of stimulus‐specific relations), the “configuration” model, and the “single‐rule” model (concept learning). Although their treatment of the multiple‐rule model, which seems most applicable to the pigeon data, is generally excellent, their discussion of the other two models is incomplete and sometimes inaccurate. Potential problems of terminology are discussed in the present paper, as are additional lines of research that deserve consideration by those interested in further work in this area. The issue of response versus stimulus selection (configuration versus compound‐cue learning) is discussed in connection with the configuration model. Particular attention is given to Carter and Werner's criticism of the application, in studies with other species, of the learning set procedure in testing for single‐rule learning. Some of the important related issues are: the bias for improvement on new problems in a series, the adequacy of a multiple‐rule model to explain learning set formation, and evidence in favor of the single‐rule model, at least in primates. Consideration of these additional contributions to the study of conditional discrimination learning emphasizes the usefulness of this task in the comparative study of cognitive processes.
doi_str_mv 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-291
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1332935</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1311448167</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5046-20547e579568336f58e2315199a75499203e8a56b3fc81a3b4ef5b3049a31f823</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUU1v00AQXSFQCYU7FyRLSNxcdna8XxyQjJMGF9eBkIrjam3W4NSJizdp6b9nQ6IIuHDZHc370Dw9Qp4DPQNN4fXS2SpMip4hxkzDAzICjSpGCfCQjChlLObhfUyeeL8MgxaSnZATiYInQEckzWblOF_kszItonH-OZvnl3mZ7hZRMUnnZV5O30RpFPaL_NPVJErLcZRefizy8zz7TXtKHjW28-7Z4T8lV-eTRfY-LmbTQCnimtNExIzyRDouNRcKUTRcOYbAQWsreaI1o-iU5aLCplZgsUpcwyukibYIjWJ4St7ufW-21cp9rd16M9jO3Aztyg73pret-RtZt9_Nt_7WACLTyIPBq4PB0P_YOr8xq9bXruvs2vVbbySnkqKCQHz5D3HZb4d1CBe8AJJEgZCBRfeseui9H1xzPAWo2ZVjduWYXTkG0YRyguTFnxGOgkMbARd7_K7t3P1__czFJH0HioogjPfC1m_cz6PQDtcmXCq5-VJOzXwsyw-ZugghfgFg3qK0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1311448167</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>CONDITIONAL DISCRIMINATION LEARNING: A CRITIQUE AND AMPLIFICATION</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Schrier, Allan M. ; Thompson, Claudia R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schrier, Allan M. ; Thompson, Claudia R.</creatorcontrib><description>Carter and Werner recently reviewed the literature on conditional discrimination learning by pigeons, which consists of studies of matching‐to‐sample and oddity‐from‐sample. They also discussed three models of such learning: the “multiple‐rule” model (learning of stimulus‐specific relations), the “configuration” model, and the “single‐rule” model (concept learning). Although their treatment of the multiple‐rule model, which seems most applicable to the pigeon data, is generally excellent, their discussion of the other two models is incomplete and sometimes inaccurate. Potential problems of terminology are discussed in the present paper, as are additional lines of research that deserve consideration by those interested in further work in this area. The issue of response versus stimulus selection (configuration versus compound‐cue learning) is discussed in connection with the configuration model. Particular attention is given to Carter and Werner's criticism of the application, in studies with other species, of the learning set procedure in testing for single‐rule learning. Some of the important related issues are: the bias for improvement on new problems in a series, the adequacy of a multiple‐rule model to explain learning set formation, and evidence in favor of the single‐rule model, at least in primates. Consideration of these additional contributions to the study of conditional discrimination learning emphasizes the usefulness of this task in the comparative study of cognitive processes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-5002</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-3711</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-291</identifier><identifier>PMID: 7365410</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Animals ; Columbidae ; concept learning ; conditional discrimination ; Conditioning (Psychology) ; Discrimination Learning ; learning set formation ; matching-to-sample ; oddity-from-sample ; Problem Solving ; Special ; Visual Perception</subject><ispartof>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1980-03, Vol.33 (2), p.291-298</ispartof><rights>1980 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5046-20547e579568336f58e2315199a75499203e8a56b3fc81a3b4ef5b3049a31f823</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5046-20547e579568336f58e2315199a75499203e8a56b3fc81a3b4ef5b3049a31f823</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1332935/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1332935/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,27871,27926,27927,53793,53795</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7365410$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schrier, Allan M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Claudia R.</creatorcontrib><title>CONDITIONAL DISCRIMINATION LEARNING: A CRITIQUE AND AMPLIFICATION</title><title>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior</title><addtitle>J Exp Anal Behav</addtitle><description>Carter and Werner recently reviewed the literature on conditional discrimination learning by pigeons, which consists of studies of matching‐to‐sample and oddity‐from‐sample. They also discussed three models of such learning: the “multiple‐rule” model (learning of stimulus‐specific relations), the “configuration” model, and the “single‐rule” model (concept learning). Although their treatment of the multiple‐rule model, which seems most applicable to the pigeon data, is generally excellent, their discussion of the other two models is incomplete and sometimes inaccurate. Potential problems of terminology are discussed in the present paper, as are additional lines of research that deserve consideration by those interested in further work in this area. The issue of response versus stimulus selection (configuration versus compound‐cue learning) is discussed in connection with the configuration model. Particular attention is given to Carter and Werner's criticism of the application, in studies with other species, of the learning set procedure in testing for single‐rule learning. Some of the important related issues are: the bias for improvement on new problems in a series, the adequacy of a multiple‐rule model to explain learning set formation, and evidence in favor of the single‐rule model, at least in primates. Consideration of these additional contributions to the study of conditional discrimination learning emphasizes the usefulness of this task in the comparative study of cognitive processes.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Columbidae</subject><subject>concept learning</subject><subject>conditional discrimination</subject><subject>Conditioning (Psychology)</subject><subject>Discrimination Learning</subject><subject>learning set formation</subject><subject>matching-to-sample</subject><subject>oddity-from-sample</subject><subject>Problem Solving</subject><subject>Special</subject><subject>Visual Perception</subject><issn>0022-5002</issn><issn>1938-3711</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1980</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUU1v00AQXSFQCYU7FyRLSNxcdna8XxyQjJMGF9eBkIrjam3W4NSJizdp6b9nQ6IIuHDZHc370Dw9Qp4DPQNN4fXS2SpMip4hxkzDAzICjSpGCfCQjChlLObhfUyeeL8MgxaSnZATiYInQEckzWblOF_kszItonH-OZvnl3mZ7hZRMUnnZV5O30RpFPaL_NPVJErLcZRefizy8zz7TXtKHjW28-7Z4T8lV-eTRfY-LmbTQCnimtNExIzyRDouNRcKUTRcOYbAQWsreaI1o-iU5aLCplZgsUpcwyukibYIjWJ4St7ufW-21cp9rd16M9jO3Aztyg73pret-RtZt9_Nt_7WACLTyIPBq4PB0P_YOr8xq9bXruvs2vVbbySnkqKCQHz5D3HZb4d1CBe8AJJEgZCBRfeseui9H1xzPAWo2ZVjduWYXTkG0YRyguTFnxGOgkMbARd7_K7t3P1__czFJH0HioogjPfC1m_cz6PQDtcmXCq5-VJOzXwsyw-ZugghfgFg3qK0</recordid><startdate>198003</startdate><enddate>198003</enddate><creator>Schrier, Allan M.</creator><creator>Thompson, Claudia R.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>JTYFY</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>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198003</creationdate><title>CONDITIONAL DISCRIMINATION LEARNING: A CRITIQUE AND AMPLIFICATION</title><author>Schrier, Allan M. ; Thompson, Claudia R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5046-20547e579568336f58e2315199a75499203e8a56b3fc81a3b4ef5b3049a31f823</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1980</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Columbidae</topic><topic>concept learning</topic><topic>conditional discrimination</topic><topic>Conditioning (Psychology)</topic><topic>Discrimination Learning</topic><topic>learning set formation</topic><topic>matching-to-sample</topic><topic>oddity-from-sample</topic><topic>Problem Solving</topic><topic>Special</topic><topic>Visual Perception</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schrier, Allan M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Claudia R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 37</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>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schrier, Allan M.</au><au>Thompson, Claudia R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>CONDITIONAL DISCRIMINATION LEARNING: A CRITIQUE AND AMPLIFICATION</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Anal Behav</addtitle><date>1980-03</date><risdate>1980</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>291</spage><epage>298</epage><pages>291-298</pages><issn>0022-5002</issn><eissn>1938-3711</eissn><abstract>Carter and Werner recently reviewed the literature on conditional discrimination learning by pigeons, which consists of studies of matching‐to‐sample and oddity‐from‐sample. They also discussed three models of such learning: the “multiple‐rule” model (learning of stimulus‐specific relations), the “configuration” model, and the “single‐rule” model (concept learning). Although their treatment of the multiple‐rule model, which seems most applicable to the pigeon data, is generally excellent, their discussion of the other two models is incomplete and sometimes inaccurate. Potential problems of terminology are discussed in the present paper, as are additional lines of research that deserve consideration by those interested in further work in this area. The issue of response versus stimulus selection (configuration versus compound‐cue learning) is discussed in connection with the configuration model. Particular attention is given to Carter and Werner's criticism of the application, in studies with other species, of the learning set procedure in testing for single‐rule learning. Some of the important related issues are: the bias for improvement on new problems in a series, the adequacy of a multiple‐rule model to explain learning set formation, and evidence in favor of the single‐rule model, at least in primates. Consideration of these additional contributions to the study of conditional discrimination learning emphasizes the usefulness of this task in the comparative study of cognitive processes.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>7365410</pmid><doi>10.1901/jeab.1980.33-291</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-5002
ispartof Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1980-03, Vol.33 (2), p.291-298
issn 0022-5002
1938-3711
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1332935
source MEDLINE; Periodicals Index Online; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central
subjects Animals
Columbidae
concept learning
conditional discrimination
Conditioning (Psychology)
Discrimination Learning
learning set formation
matching-to-sample
oddity-from-sample
Problem Solving
Special
Visual Perception
title CONDITIONAL DISCRIMINATION LEARNING: A CRITIQUE AND AMPLIFICATION
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T08%3A46%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=CONDITIONAL%20DISCRIMINATION%20LEARNING:%20A%20CRITIQUE%20AND%20AMPLIFICATION&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20experimental%20analysis%20of%20behavior&rft.au=Schrier,%20Allan%20M.&rft.date=1980-03&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=291&rft.epage=298&rft.pages=291-298&rft.issn=0022-5002&rft.eissn=1938-3711&rft_id=info:doi/10.1901/jeab.1980.33-291&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1311448167%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1311448167&rft_id=info:pmid/7365410&rfr_iscdi=true