Revaluation manipulations produce emergence of underselected stimuli following simultaneous discrimination in humans

Stimulus overselectivity occurs when only one of potentially many aspects of the environment controls behaviour. In four experiments, human participants were trained and tested on a trial-and-error simultaneous discrimination task involving two two-element compound stimuli. Overselectivity emerged in all experiments (i.e., one element from the reinforced compound controlled behaviour at the expense of the other). Following revaluation (extinction) of the previously overselected stimulus, behavioural control by the underselected stimulus element emerged without any direct training of that stimulus element. However, while a series of extinction manipulations targeting the revaluation of the overselected stimulus produced differential extinction of that stimulus, they did not result in differential emergence of the previously underselected stimuli. The results are discussed with respect to the theoretical implications for attention-based accounts of overselectivity.     

Revaluation manipulations produce emergence of underselected stimuli following simultaneous discrimination in humans

Stimulus overselectivity occurs when only one of potentially many aspects of the environment controls behaviour. In four experiments, human participants were trained and tested on a trial-and-error simultaneous discrimination task involving two two-element compound stimuli. Overselectivity emerged in all experiments (i.e., one element from the reinforced compound controlled behaviour at the expense of the other). Following revaluation (extinction) of the previously overselected stimulus, behavioural control by the underselected stimulus element emerged without any direct training of that stimulus element. However, while a series of extinction manipulations targeting the revaluation of the overselected stimulus produced differential extinction of that stimulus, they did not result in differential emergence of the previously underselected stimuli. The results are discussed with respect to the theoretical implications for attention-based accounts of overselectivity.     

Age trends in stimulus overselectivity

Stimulus overselectivity refers to the phenomenon whereby stimulus control over behavior is exerted only by a limited subset of the total number of stimuli present during discrimination learning. It often is displayed by individuals with autistic spectrum disorders or learning disabilities, but is not exclusive to those groups. The present studies investigated the impact of aging on stimulus control and overselectivity. Three age groups--18-22, 47-55, and 70-80 year olds-were studied in two experiments. All participants were trained on a simple discrimination task, randomly assigned to one of two conditions (either with or without a distractor task), and then tested for the emergence of overselectivity (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2 responding controlled by the overselected stimulus elements was reduced by introducing a verbal punisher. In subsequent tests, control of behavior by the previously underselected elements from Experiment 1 was enhanced across the two younger age groups but not the oldest group of participants. The results are discussed in relation to the attention-deficit and overshadowing accounts of overselectivity.     

STIMULUS OVERSELECTIVITY IN LEARNING DISABLED CHILDREN

Stimulus overselectivity, a phenomenon exhibited by autistic and institutionalized retarded individuals, was examined in mildly handicapped and nonhandicapped public school children. Subjects were 16 young, educable mentally retarded, 16 learning disabled, 15 nonhandicapped first- and second-graders, and 16 older, educable retarded students. The children were trained on a 3-component visual discrimination task and then tested on individual elements to determine which element or elements were controlling subject responses. Nine of the young educable mentally retarded children and eight of the learning disabled students showed some overselectivity. The majority of overselective retarded children were controlled by only one of the three components of the training cue, whereas the majority of the overselective learning disabled children responded to the discrimination task on the basis of two of the three components. No overselectivity was exhibited by the nonhandicapped students. All three cue components were also functional in controlling the responding of 14 of the 16 older retarded students, but two children were under the control of only one cue. The research indicated that in terms of overselectivity, learning disabled children respond more like young, mildly retarded children than they do like nonhandicapped ones. The demonstration of stimulus overselectivity in a sizable portion of a learning disabled sample may have implications for a more empirically based approach to this handicapped population.     

Reduction of stimulus overselectivity with nonverbal differential observing responses

Three individuals with mental retardation exhibited stimulus overselectivity in a delayed matching-to-sample task in which two sample stimuli were displayed on each trial. Intermediate accuracy scores indicated that participants could match one of the samples but not both of them. Accuracy in a baseline condition was compared to accuracy with a differential observing response procedure. This procedure prompted participants to make simultaneous identity-matching responses that required observation and discrimination of both sample stimuli. These observing responses were never followed by differential consequences. When observing responses were prompted, participants' accuracy scores improved. In a return to the baseline condition, when differential observing responses were no longer prompted, accuracy returned to intermediate levels. The results show that stimulus overselectivity can be greatly reduced by a behavioral intervention that controls observing behavior and verifies discrimination, but that exposure to such procedures alone may be insufficient for lasting benefits.     

The effects of a graduated stimulus change on the acquisition of a simple discrimination in severely retarded boys

Methods were compared for teaching severely retarded boys to discriminate the position of a 0.75-in. black square and to press the response key closest to it. Seven boys were given trial-and-error training; one learned the task. The six boys who did not learn were presented with a program of graduated stimulus changes. All but one acquired the performance, and he was under appropriate control during the program. When he reached the criterion stimuli, he reverted to a position-based response learned during trial-and-error training. Six similar subjects were presented with graduated stimulus training alone. All six learned the criterion discrimination with few or no errors. Both groups were tested for retention of the criterion performance 35 days after training was completed. Two boys who had near-perfect criterion discrimination performances showed no signs of retention after 35 days. These boys had a history of trial-and-error training.     

Reinforcer frequency and restricted stimulus control.

Stimulus control was evaluated in 3 individuals with moderate to severe mental retardation by delayed identity matching-to-sample procedures that presented either one or two discrete forms as sample stimuli on each trial. On pretests, accuracy scores on one-sample trials were uniformly high. On two-sample trials, the correct stimulus (i.e., the one that subsequently appeared in the comparison array) varied unpredictably, and accuracy scores were substantially lower, suggesting that both sample stimuli did not exert stimulus control on every trial. Subjects were then given training sessions with the one-sample task and with a new set of four stimuli. For two of the stimuli, correct matching responses were followed by reinforcers on a variable-ratio schedule that led to a high reinforcer rate. For the other two stimuli, correct responses were followed by reinforcers on a variable-ratio schedule that led to a substantially lower reinforcer rate. Results on two-sample tests that followed showed that (a) on trials in which comparison arrays consisted of one high reinforcer-rate and one low reinforcer-rate stimulus, subjects most often selected the high-rate stimulus; and (b) on trials in which the comparison arrays were either two high reinforcer-rate stimuli or two low reinforcer-rate stimuli and the samples were one high reinforcer- and one low reinforcer-rate stimulus, accuracy was higher on trials with the high-rate comparisons. These results indicate that the frequency of stimulus control by high reinforcer-rate samples was greater than that by low reinforcer-rate samples. Following more training with the one-sample task and reversed reinforcement schedules for all stimuli, the differences in stimulus control frequencies on two-sample tests also reversed. These results demonstrate experimental control by reinforcement contingencies of which of two sample stimuli controlled selections in the two-sample task. The procedures and results may prove to be relevant for understanding restricted stimulus control and stimulus overselectivity.     

Blocking the development of stimulus control when stimuli indicate periods of nonreinforcement

To learn whether prior discrimination training based on one stimulus would block learning about a subsequently added stimulus, rats were first trained to press a bar on a variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement. Occasional stimuli were presented during which no reinforcement was available. Responding became suppressed in the presence of these stimuli. Stimuli could be noise, light, or a compound of noise plus light. A group trained with noise in Phase 1, then trained with the compound in Phase 2, showed less suppression to light in a subsequent test than a group that had the same compound training in Phase 2 but only variable-interval training in Phase 1. This showed that prior training with noise blocked the development of control by light during compound training. Two further groups showed that noise training following compound training did not have the same effect on control by light.     

The generality of overselectivity in developmentally disabled children

A growing body of research suggests that low Mental Age (MA) autistic and retarded children show a unique stimulus control deficit, one that may cause many or most of their behavioral deficiencies. This problem, stimulus overselectivity, is evidenced when a child responds only to a restricted portion of the stimulus environment when compared with normal children. The purpose of this study was to assess whether this overselectivity is general across situations or whether it is restricted to certain stimulus/task conditions. Eight autistic children, who evidenced overselectivity on a preassessment task, and 8 normal children with similar MA levels participated. All children were trained on 3 tasks to determine if overselectivity varied as a function of different stimulus conditions. Each of the 3 tasks involved training a child to respond to (i.e., touch) a card containing a circle (S +) and to avoid a blank (S ?) card. In each case, the circle comprised a series of dots. The difference between the 3 circles (tasks) was the distance between the successive dots making up each circle. Also, in the minimal separation condition the dots were smaller in size and greater in number than in the larger separation conditions. Of concern was whether autistic children learned about the gestalt (i.e., the circle), which required attention to multiple cues, or whether children would overselect and respond to the dots. The results showed that (1) stimulus overselectivity was found not to be a generalized deficit in autistic subjects; instead, it varied as a function of the stimulus variables; and (2) the stimulus variables manipulated in this study similarly influenced the responding of both normal and autistic children. The implications of these data for a theory of overselectivity are discussed.     

Analysis of discriminative control by social behavioral stimuli

Visual discriminative control of the behavior of one rat by the behavior of another was studied in a two-compartment chamber. Each rat's compartment had a food cup and two response keys arranged vertically next to the clear partition that separated the two rats. Illumination of the leader's key lights signaled a “search” period when a response by the leader on the unsignaled and randomly selected correct key for that trial illuminated the follower's keys. Then, a response by the follower on the corresponding key was reinforced, or a response on the incorrect key terminated the trial without reinforcement. Accuracy of following the leader increased to 85% within 15 sessions. Blocking the view of the leader reduced accuracy but not to chance levels. Apparent control by visual behavioral stimuli was also affected by auditory stimuli and a correction procedure. When white noise eliminated auditory cues, social learning was not acquired as fast nor as completely. A reductionistic position holds that behavioral stimuli are the same as nonsocial stimuli; however, that does not mean that they do not require any separate treatment. Behavioral stimuli are usually more variable than nonsocial stimuli, and further study is required to disentangle behavioral and nonsocial contributions to the stimulus control of social interactions.     

Discrimination of word-like compound visual stimuli by monkeys

In Experiment I, two monkeys solved a successive visual discrimination in which the four positive stimuli were the visual arrays RIM, LID, RAD and LAM while the four negative stimuli were RID, LIM, RAM and LAD. In Experiment II the same monkeys first learned a discrimination where the positive stimuli were pairs of letters (e.g. OB and AK) while the negative stimulus was the letter I; in a subsequent generalization test with all four possible pairings of the stimulus elements that had been positive during training (i.e. with OB, AK, OK and AB) the monkeys responded more strongly to the pairs that had been present in initial training. These results were discussed in relation to the theoretical analysis of configurational cues in animal discrimination learning and to the mechanism underlying visual discrimination of words by people.     

Eliminating selective stimulus control: a comparison of two procedures for teaching mentally retarded children to respond to compound stimuli

Selective stimulus control occurs when behavior fails to come under control of all characteristics of a compound stimulus after discrimination training. Two different assessment procedures, one used in prior research and the other incorporating incorrect stimuli (S - 's) which differed minimally from the correct stimulus (S+), were used to detect stimulus control deficits characteristic of selective stimulus control. The efficacy of two training procedures in eliminating selective stimulus control observed with three trainable mentally retarded children was evaluated in Experiment 1. A training procedure using S - 's that were minimally different from the S+ was designed to reduce the probability that stimulus discriminations could be based on stimulus characteristics other than experimenter-specified characteristics defining the S+. This procedure proved more effective in preventing and eliminating selective stimulus control as measured by both assessment procedures than an alternate discrimination training procedure that failed to impact the more stringent measures of selective stimulus control. Experiment 2 indicated that these improvements in stimulus control were not a function of varying degrees of difficulty between stimulus sets or of a prior history of discrimination training with the less effective training procedure. The need for better assessment procedures to detect selective stimulus control and suggestions for further improvements in discrimination training procedures are discussed.     

Reducing stimulus overselectivity in autistic children

It has been repeatedly reported that when presented with a discrimination task involving multiple cues, autistic children, as compared to normal children, tend to respond on the basis of only a restricted portion of the component cues. This phenomenon has been called stimulus overselectivity and has been implicated as a possible basis for some of the pronounced behavioral deficits characteristic of autism. Examination of the results of several previous studies suggests that the overselectivity effect might be reduced with repeated exposure to testing. However, since the previous studies were not designed to test this hypothesis, no conclusions were drawn regarding variables influencing the reduction of the overselectivity phenomenon. The present investigation was therefore conducted to determine if stimulus overselectivity in autistic children is changed as a function of repeated exposure to testing. Nineteen autistic children were trained on a discrimination task with a cue complex composed of two visual cues. After the children reached criterion on the task, they were exposed to a testing phase with probe trials where the cue components were presented singly. The results indicated that 16 of the children initially showed overselectivity and 3 responded to both cues. Of the 16 children who showed overselectivity, 13 decreased their level of overselectivity with continued testing. These results are discussed in relation to variables in the testing procedure itself and to the literature on selective attention.This research was funded by USPHS Research Grants MH11440, MH28210, and MH28231 from the National Institute of Mental Health. The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of Cathy Hook, Hannelore Wilhelm, and Jon Killion in conducting this research.     

Some detrimental effects of using extra stimuli to guide learning in normal and autistic children

This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of using prompts (extra "guiding" stimuli) for teaching normal and autistic children. One group of normal children was pretrained on a color discrimination. Later, the colors were used as prompts (presented simultaneously with new training stimuli) to teach four new discriminations. Another group of normal children was trained on the same discriminations with a trial-and-error procedure (i.e., no prompting). A third group consisted of autistic children who were trained on these discriminations using the prompt procedure. Analyses of the results showed the following. (1) The trial-and-error group of normal children acquired more discriminations than the prompt group of normal children. (2) A comparison of the two prompt groups showed that the autistics failed to transfer from the prompt cue to the training cue more often than the normal children; rather, the autistics generally continued responding to the faded color cue. (3) Autistic and normal children who failed to acquire the discriminations when trained with a prompt procedure did acquire these discriminations when no prompt was used. That is, the results suggest that the presentation of an extra guiding stimulus was detrimental to the acquisition of training discriminations for all subjects, and particularly so far autistic children. Therefore, the common practice of providing extra guiding stimuli in proportion to the severity of the learning disorder may actually be harmful to the learning of new skills. Implications of these results for future research are discussed.     

Sensory noise explains auditory frequency discrimination learning induced by training with identical stimuli

Thresholds in various visual and auditory perception tasks have been found to improve markedly with practice at intermediate levels of task difficulty. Recently, however, there have been reports that training with identical stimuli, which, by definition, were impossible to discriminate correctly beyond chance, could induce as much discrimination learning as could training with different stimuli. These surprising findings have been interpreted as evidence that discrimination learning can occur in the absence of perceived differences between stimuli and need not involve the fine-tuning of a discrimination mechanism. Here, we show that these counterintuitive findings of discrimination learning without discrimination can be understood simply by considering the effect of internal noise on sensory representations. Because of such noise, physically identical stimuli are unlikely to be perceived as being strictly identical. We show that, given empirically derived levels of sensory noise, perceived differences evoked by identical stimuli are actually not much smaller than those induced by the physical differences typically used in discrimination-learning experiments. We suggest that findings of discrimination learning with identical stimuli can be explained without implicating any fundamentally new learning mechanism.     

Derived control by compound and single stimuli in a matching-to-sample task in children

A matching-to-sample procedure was used to investigate whether 9-year-old children would demonstrate the emergence of a derived compound-sample conditional discrimination following training in four interrelated single-sample conditional discriminations and vice versa, as adults did in previous studies. In Experiment 1, three out of three children demonstrated the emergence of a compound-sample conditional discrimination following training in four single-sample conditional discriminations. In Experiment 2, two out of three children acquired a compound-sample conditional discrimination and they demonstrated the emergence of four single-sample conditional discriminations; one of them did so only after being exposed to a remediation training and testing procedure. Training variables that facilitated discrimination emergence in both directions are discussed. In general, results showed that the sophisticated learning skills that are supposedly possessed by adults are not required to demonstrate the two types of derived control under study.     

Stimulus control in a simple instrumental task: The role of internal and external stimuli

Two experiments using rats in a straight alley runway task tested the hypothesis that standard stimuli such as tones and lights (“external” stimuli) and schedule-generated aftereffect stimuli (“internal” stimuli) operate similarly and are similarly subject to the compounding rules specified by R. A. Rescorla and A. R. Wagner (In A. Black & W. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current theory and research. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1972). The experimental task was an instrumental analog of the classic blocking experiment (L. J. Kamin, In M. R. Jones (Ed.). In Experiment 1, blocking of an external discriminative stimulus by a different asymptotic discrimination was accomplished. In Experiment 2, blocking of an internal stimulus discrimination by an asymptotic external stimulus discrimination was obtained. The present results support the view that internal and external stimuli are indeed similar and function in the same manner with regard to blocking of stimulus control.     

Stimulus control by same-versus-different relations among multiple visual stimuli

The authors devised a go/no-go discrimination learning task that allowed but did not require pigeons to report (a) from which of 2 different sets a collection of visual items was drawn and (b) the relations between or among the items as being the same as or different from one another. The results of 2 experiments using this task disclosed stimulus control by the particular items in the arrays and by the same-different relations exemplified by those items. Relational and item control depended on how many items were in the arrays. Same-different discrimination was evident with 2-item displays, but it was much stronger with 6 or more items. These findings help to define the substrates of advanced conceptual behavior.     

Same/different discrimination learning with trial-unique stimuli

A long-standing issue in same/different discrimination learning concerns the possible role of individual stimulus memory through repeated presentation. The aim of eliminating any effect of repetition prompted us to devise a new method for generating trial-unique stimuli. These stimuli were arrays of 16 mosaics, each containing 16 cells, which could be filled with 16 possible luminance levels. In Experiment 1, we successfully trained 4 pigeons with these trial-unique stimuli in a two-alternative forced choice same/different discrimination task to 80% correct-choice performance. We later conducted two tests that explored the nature of this discrimination and suggested that pigeons compared the mosaics in the arrays on the basis of their spatial configurations, not on the basis of lower level perceptual properties. In Experiment 2, college students responded similarly to the same sequence of training and testing. Our results suggest that pigeons and people may use similar mechanisms in relational discrimination learning.     

Overselective response to social stimuli by autistic children

Previous studies have shown that when presented with a complex stimulus input, autistic children typically respond to only one of the elements of the complex. This phenomenon was called stimulus overselectivity (or overselective attention). The present investigation sought to determine if this overselectivity might be a possible basis for the deviant social behavior in autistic children. Autistic and normal children were trained to discriminate between clothed girl and boy doll figures. After the children had acquired this discrimination, the individual clothing components and the heads were systematically interchanged between the figures. Thus, it could be determined which component(s) the children had used to make the discrimination. The autistic children demonstrated stimulus overselectivity in that they formed the discrimination between the boy and girl figures on the basis of only one component or of peculiar combinations of components. For example, one child discriminated the figures on the basis of shoes. In contrast, the normal children responded primarily to the figures' heads but could also respond correctly to other parts. These findings are consistent with previous research on stimulus overselectivity and have implications for understanding the difficulty autistic children show in forming meaningful social relationships.This investigation was supported by U.S. Public Health Service Research Grant 11440 from the National Institute of Mental Health.The authors express their appreciation to James Q. Simmons, Associate Chief, Mental Retardation and Child Mental Health Programs, Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, Los Angeles; and Norbert Rieger, Superintendent of Children's Services, Camarillo State Hospital, Camarillo, California. They are also grateful to Robert Koegel and to Thomas Willis for their valuable suggestions and to Meredith Gibbs for her assistance in data collection.