Reexamining the frustration effect in rats: Aftereffects of surprising reinforcement and nonreinforcement

The reinforcement-omission effect (ROE; also called frustration effect), or greater response strength immediately after nonreinforcement (N) than reinforcement (R), has been traditionally interpreted in terms of one of two factors: transient facilitation after N induced by primary frustration or transient suppression after R induced by postconsummatory processes. Three instrumental lever-pressing experiments with rats demonstrated that the ROE can be caused by either factor in isolation, or by both acting simultaneously. The distribution of trials and the interval between N or R and the target response determine which factor would cause the ROE. Both aftereffects decay in time, but the after-N process decays at a slower rate than the after-R factor.     

The effect of frustrative nonreward on the attractiveness of the omitted reward

Two experiments were performed to test the hypothesis that omission of a previously received reward is followed by greater motivation to obtain that specific reward, as compared with the case where the reward had been present. In Experiment 1, experimental rats regularly received food rewards (R_a) at one goal, followed by a choice between food and milk (R_b). Control animals received the same choice without food preceding it. Reward magnitudes were manipulated so as to produce a preference for R_b, and additional forced trials were given each day to equalise experience of the two rewards. In the test phase both groups received trials with R_a present (R) or absent (N) at the first goal. The experimental Ss shifted their choice towards R_a on N trials; the controls did not behave differently after R and N. Experiment 2 was similar, except that R_a was milk and R_b food. The same effect of N on experimental animals was obtained. It is argued that the results are relevant to the double-runway ‘frustration effect’, and cannot be explained by existing theories of frustration.     

The temporal course of the frustration effect

General activity subsequent to reward (R) and nonreward (N) was monitored at 5-sec intervals with a stabilimeter in the runway goal box. Activity of never-rewarded control Ss was also measured. In Expt 1 it was found that the frustration effect (difference between N- and R-trial activities) disappeared after about 40 sec of goal box confinement. This disappearance of the frustration effect was due to activity increase on R trials rather than activity decrease on N trials as a function of time. Comparison of N-trial activity with control group activity indicated that frustration does not dissipate within 60 sec. Expt 2 investigated activity following reward and nonreward as a function of reward magnitude. Evidence from these experiments suggests that the late R-trial activity increase results from frustration, possibly conditioned to apparatus cues on N trials.     

Incentive shift in the rat following training to resist punishment

An incentive shift paradigm was used to test for the similarity of fear and frustration. In Experiment 1, rats trained to resist electric shock punishment showed neither a negative contrast effect nor any performance decrement when reward was shifted from 10 to one pellet. Experiment 2 replicated the basic findings of Experiment 1, but also showed that punishment training did not influence the magnitude of performance shift for animals receiving increases in reward magnitude. Finally, Experiment 3 additionally found that rats sensitized to punishment showed an increase in negative contrast effect. These results support the hypothesized functional similarity between conditioned fear and conditioned frustration with learned persistence or sensitivity to one generalizing to the other as suggested by Amsel's (1972) theory of persistence.     

Organized responding in instrumental learning: Chunks and superchunks

Two investigations attempted to determine if rats could learn that the second series of runway trials, the test series, was the same as the first series, the study series. Series were constructed from runway responses which terminated either in food reward (R) or nonreward (N). In the series RNR, for example, three successive responses terminated in R, N, and R, respectively. Rats manifested mastery of a series by running fast to R and slow to N. In Experiment 1 the test series (either RNR or RNN) occurred in a black runway about 15 s after the study series presented in a white runway. In Experiment 2 the test series (either RN or RRN) occurred in a gray runway about 15 min after the study series, also in a gray runway. In both experiments rats learned that the study series was the same as the test series. A hierarchical interpretation was suggested in which runway trials are organized into series, series being organized into lists.     

A frustration effect with adult humans?

In two investigations, the relationship of delays in response opportunity to response latencies was examined. On the basis of a generalized drive approach it was expected that the longer the delays, the greater the frustration, and that consequently the response latencies would be reduced. It was further hypothesized that the frustration effect would be enhanced for Internal locus of control subjects relative to Externals. Although statistically significant relationships between delays in opportunity to respond and response latencies were found, the pattern of the results did not appear to support a generalized drive interpretation of the effects. Consequently, the relationship between partial reward and response latencies that had been previously interpreted as a frustration effect by Libb and Serum (1974) was examined in a third experiment. Again, the results were supportive of specific factors other than a generalized frustration effect.Experiment 3 was conducted by the second author as partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master's degree. We are grateful to Nancy Lindstrom Miller and Gary Ramseyer for their assistance.     

The Mechanism Underlying Backward Priming in a Lexical Decision Task: Spreading Activation versus Semantic Matching

Koriat (1981) demonstrated that an association from the target to a preceding prime, in the absence of an association from the prime to the target, facilitates lexical decision and referred to this effect as 'backward priming'. Backward priming is of relevance, because it can provide information about the mechanism underlying semantic priming effects. Following Neely (1991), we distinguish three mechanisms of priming: spreading activation, expectancy, and semantic matching/ integration. The goal was to determine which of these mechanisms causes backward priming, by assessing effects of backward priming on a language-relevant ERP component, the N400, and reaction time (R T). Based on previous work, we propose that the N400 priming effect reflects expectancy and semantic matching/ integration, but in contrast with R T does not reflect spreading activation. Experiment 1 shows a backward priming effect that is qualitatively similar for the N400 and R T in a lexical decision task. This effect was not modulated by an ISI manipulation. Experiment 2 clarifies that the N400 backward priming effect reflects genuine changes in N400 amplitude and cannot be ascribed to other factors. We will argue that these backward priming effects cannot be due to expectancy but are best accounted for in terms of semantic matching/ integration.     

Transfer of orthogonal stimulus–response mappings to an orthogonal Simon task

When up–down stimulus locations are mapped to left–right keypresses, an overall advantage for the up–right/down–left mapping is often obtained that varies as a function of response eccentricity. This orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility (SRC) effect also occurs when stimulus location is irrelevant, a phenomenon called the orthogonal Simon effect, and has been attributed to correspondence of stimulus and response code polarities. The Simon effect for horizontal stimulus–response (S–R) arrangements has been shown to be affected by short-term S–R associations established through the mapping used for a prior SRC task in which stimulus location was relevant. We examined whether such associations also transfer between orthogonal SRC and Simon tasks and whether correspondence of code polarities continues to contribute to performance in the Simon task. In Experiment 1, the orthogonal Simon effect was larger after practising with an up–right/down–left mapping of visual stimuli to responses than with the alternative mapping, for which the orthogonal Simon effect tended to reverse. Experiment 2 showed similar results when practice was with high (up) and low (down) pitch tones, though the influence of practice mapping was not as large as that in Experiment 1, implying that the short-term S–R associations acquired in practice are at least in part not modality specific. In Experiment 3, response eccentricity and practice mapping were shown to have separate influences on the orthogonal Simon effect, as expected if both code polarity and acquired S–R associations contribute to performance.     

Frustration odor of rats receiving small numbers of prior rewarded running trials

Three related experiments were performed to examine trial-to-trial differences in production of frustration odor during runway extinction by rats that had received 0, 2, 4, or 6 prior rewards. Differences in odor production were indexed by the subsequent speed of escape from the runway goal box by conspecifics. The results indicated that (a) subjects will perform a hurdle-jump response to escape from frustration odor; (b) escape performance even after several prior escape trials accurately reflects trial-to-trial changes in production of frustration odor; and (c) production of frustration odor requires only 4 prior rewards. Implications of the present data for frustration analyses of the limited-trial partial reinforcement effect and future investigations of frustration odor are discussed.     

The Simon effect with wheel-rotation responses

The authors examined clockwise and counterclockwise wheel-rotation responses to high- or low-pitched tones presented in participants' (N = 96, Experiment 1; N = 48, Experiment 2; N = 48, Experiment 3) left and right ears. In Experiment 1, a Simon effect (fastest responding when tone location and direction of wheel turn corresponded) was obtained when participants' hands were at the top or middle of the wheel but not at the bottom. With the bottom hand placement, a Simon effect was induced by instructions emphasizing hand movements but not by instructions emphasizing wheel movements (Experiment 2), and by a visual cursor controlled by the wheel but not one triggered by the response (Experiment 3). The results of the experiments showed that the nature of the task and the instructed action goal influence the direction of the Simon effect.     

Differential runway performance using goal box placement and running trials as discriminative stimuli

Two experiments compared the effects of reinforced, partially reinforced and nonreinforced intertrial goal box placements (ITR, ITP, and ITN respectively) on runway performance. In Experiment I differential responding (animals running slower on nonreinforced (N) trials than on reinforced (R) trials) was observed during acquisition for subjects receiving ITP preceding N trials or subjects receiving ITP before R trials, and also for subjects receiving ITR preceding N trials. No differential responding was observed in subjects receiving ITP prior to both N and R trials or ITN prior to N trials. In extinction, the subjects which had responded differentially during acquisition demonstrated reduced resistance to extinction in comparison to the subjects which had not. In Experiment II, a 2 × 2 factorial design was utilized with placement schedule (ITN and ITP) and type of trial predicted by placement (N and R) serving as the factors. Differential responding was observed in all four groups. The apparent contradiction between the results and the discrimination hypothesis proposed by Capaldi and Olivier (1967) to explain the attenuation of ITR and ITN effects on resistance to extinction is discussed.     

Recall order determines the magnitude of directed forgetting in the within-participants list method

In three experiments, we investigated the effect of recall order on directed forgetting when the within-participants list method is used. Experiment 1 showed that participants tend to recall to-be-remembered (R) items before to-be-forgotten (F) items when they can recall items in any order. In Experiment 2, recall order was manipulated (F-R or R-F). The results showed that only the R-F order led to directed forgetting. Finally, in Experiment 3, recall order was also manipulated, and half of the participants were explicitly instructed to use a relational strategy when both F and R items were presented. Again, only the R-F order led to directed forgetting. These results demonstrate that directed forgetting under the list method hinges on the output order in which participants recall the F and R information. Thus, output order should be taken into account by researchers investigating specific mechanisms that lead to directed forgetting.     

情绪韵律调节情绪词识别的ERP研究

采用韵律/词汇干扰范式和延迟匹配任务, 通过两个ERP实验, 考察了汉语口语中情绪韵律能否、以及如何调节情绪词的识别。实验一中, 不同类型的情绪韵律分组呈现, ERP结果显示, 同与情绪韵律效价一致的情绪词相比, 与情绪韵律效价不一致的情绪词诱发了走向更负的P200、N300和N400成分; 实验二中, 不同类型的情绪韵律随机呈现, 上述效价一致性效应依然存在。实验结果表明, 情绪韵律能够调节情绪词识别, 主要表现在对情绪词的音韵编码和语义加工的双重易化上。     

Performance and learning of generalized motor programs: relative (GMP) and absolute (parameter) errors

The effects of practice (Experiment 1) and parameter variability (Experiment 2) on the learning of generalized motor programs (GMPs) and movement parameterization were investigated. In each experiment, 2 tasks with different relative force-time structures were tested. Participants (N = 32, Experiment 1; N = 40, Experiment 2) attempted to exert a pattern of force that resembled in force and time a waveform that was displayed on a computer monitor. In both experiments, the analysis suggested that the GMP, although refined over practice, was relatively stable (i.e., resistant to decay and interference), even early in practice (after 20 trials). In addition, the results indicated that constant and variable parameter practice did not differentially affect GMP learning but did degrade the learning of the parameter that was not varied. The data provided additional evidence for the dissociation of the GMP and the parameterization processes proposed in GMP theory. Contrary to schema theory, the present data suggest an interdependence between the force and the time parameters: The manipulation of 1 of the parameters has a negative effect on the learning of the other parameter.     

Odor production and utilization under conditions of nonreward and small reward

A series of five experiments was conducted to examine odor production and utilization under conditions of contrasting large and small reward. Using daily, eight-trial double-alternation sequences of reward (L)-nonreward (N) or small reward (S), i.e., LLNNLLNN and LLSSLLSS, appropriate patterning was shown only when an empty goalbox was initially encountered on N or S trials (Experiments 1–5). Manipulations designed to increase frustration, for example, preceding double-alternation training with a block of large-reward trials in Experiment 2, or increasing the L vs S ratio in Experiment 3, failed to yield patterning when small reward was presented at the start of the S-trial confinement period. Patterning was shown when small reward was presented at the end of the S-trial confinement (Experiments 4 and 5). Immediate vs delayed (30 sec) S or N trial goalbox removal failed to result in differences in patterning (Experiments 1 and 2). To distinguish odor production from odor use, subjects trained on an LLSSLLSS pattern preceded subjects trained on an LLNNLLNN pattern (Experiment 5). Because patterning failed to develop in the LLSSLLSS subjects and the first subject in the LLNNLLNN group, it was concluded that a discriminably different cue was not produced on S trials under the LLSSLLSS sequence when small reward was delivered at the beginning of the goalbox confinement period. Shifting small-reward delivery to the end of goalbox confinement resulted in the immediate display of patterning by the first LLNNLLNN subject, and the subsequent development of patterning by the LLSSLLSS subjects.     

Odor from rats tasting a signal of illness

Rats running in a runway emit discriminable odors when encountering reward (R) or nonreward (N) goal events, and subsequent rats use these odors as discriminative stimuli to alter their approach speeds. In the present studies, a third goal event, aversively conditioned denatonium saccharide (A), was introduced. In Experiment 1, rats evidently emitted an odor when encountering the A goal event, because in the presence of this A odor subsequent conspecifics slowed their approach to the goal, much like their behavior on N trials. In Experiment 2, when N odor signaled R goal events and A odor signaled A goal events, rats approached quickly to N but slowly to A, indicating that they could discriminate N and A odors at the given concentrations. These studies indicate that rats emit an odor when confronted with a signal of impending illness and that this odor seems readily discriminable from R and N odors.     

In search of counter-examples: Deductive rationality in human reasoning

Dual-process theories come in many forms. They draw on the distinction between associative, heuristic, tacit, intuitive, or implicit processes (System 1) and rule-based, analytic, explicit processes (System 2). We present the results of contextual manipulations that have a bearing on the supposed primacy of System 1 (Stanovich & West, 2000). Experiment 1 showed that people who evaluated logically valid or invalid conditional inferences under a timing constraint (N=56), showed a smaller effect of logical validity than did people who were not placed under a timing constraint (N= 44). Experiment 2 similarly showed that stressing the logical constraint that only inferences that follow necessarily are to be endorsed (N = 36) increased the size of the validity effect, as compared to that of participants (N=33) given the standard instruction to make "logical" inferences. These findings concur with the thesis in dual-processing frameworks that "Rationality-2 processes" (Evans & Over, 1996), "test procedures" (Chater & Oaksford, 1999), or "conclusion validation processes" (Johnson-Laird & Byrne, 1991; Schroyens, Schaeken, & d'Ydewalle, 2001) serve to override the results of System 1 processes.     

Integration and representation in rats' serial pattern learning in the T-maze

Rats were exposed to three-trial series consisting of reinforced (R) trials and one nonreinforced (N) trial in a fixed order, RRN and RNR (Experiments 1 and 2) or NRR and RRN (Experiment 3), on extended visually distinct runways in a T-maze. When initially presented with the same sequence on each series in a session (separate presentations) with the same runway on all trials within a series (Experiments 1 and 3), all the rats developed slower running speeds on N than on R trials. When a runway was sometimes changed between the first and next two trials during separate presentations training (Experiment 2) or both sequences were later intermixed within each session in each experiment, only rats exposed to each sequence on a specific runway maintained these serial running patterns. Rats displayed serial running patterns on a test RNN sequence similar to that on the RNR sequence (Experiment 2), as would be predicted by an intertrial association model of serial pattern learning (Capaldi & Molina, 1979), but responded on test RRR and NRN sequences (Experiment 3) as would be predicted by an ordinal-trial-tag/intratrial association model (Burns, Wiley, & Payne, 1986). Results from test series of free-choice trials in Experiments 1 and 2 failed to support a prediction of the intratrial association model that these rats would integrate RRN and RNR sequences. Rather than always selecting a baited runway on both the second and the third free-choice trials, the rats only selected a baited runway on the third trial on the basis of their choice on the second trial, as would be predicted by the intertrial association model. Only after experiencing all possible outcome sequences during forced-choice training in Experiment 3 did these rats predominantly select a baited runway on every free-choice trial.     

基于时间分割的手写输入系统的用户绩效模型

为定量估计与提高基于时间分割的手写输入系统用户绩效 ,推导了用户绩效的静态与动态模型。实验一检验与修正了这两个模型 ,并获得整合模型。实验二证明该整合模型能对不同训练水平用户的绩效有较高的解释率。应用该整合模型发现 :当识别正确率RA、输入字数N为定值时 ,修改时间T、单字手写时间WT、分割时间ST、识别时间R这四个因素对任务完成时间D的影响大小次序为WT =ST =R >T ;当这四个因素为定值时 ,RA每提高 1% ,D至少节省 10 0 0ms。