Adaptation level as an explanation of the peak shift in generalization with movement stimuli

Two experiments examine the value of adaptation level theory as an explanation of the peak shift phenomenon in stimulus generalization using linear arm movements. The first experiment manipulates the differences in adaptation levels during training by varying the frequency of experience of the training stimulus. Significant shifts in the peaks of generalization gradients were subsequently identified. The peak shifts were in the direction predicted by adaptation level theory. The second experiment manipulates testing adaptation levels by biasing the generalization test movements. Three groups of subjects performed differentially weighted test sequences in which the relative number of short, medium, or long movements was manipulated. Significant peak shifts of generalization gradients were observed in the direction predicted by adaptation level theory.     

Stimulus generalization and the peak shift with movement stimuli

Stimulus generalization is suggested as an alternative method for examination of the "novelty" problem in motor learning. These experiments demonstrated that stimulus generalization occurs using simple movements as stimuli. The phenomenon of the "peak shift" in post-discrimination generalization gradients was also examined. The first experiment demonstrated that a peak shift occurred using linear movements as stimuli and that the magnitude of the peak shift increased as the difference between the training stimuli decreased. The second experiment showed similar results when the stimuli consisted of a range of movements rather than single movement length. The final experiment provided evidence that perception of movement length is influenced by the magnitude of an immediately preceding movement. The relevance of these studies to current motor-learning theory is discussed.     

Stimulus Generalization and the Peak Shift with Movement Stimuli

Stimulus generalization is suggested as an alternative method for examination of the “novelty? problem in motor learning. These experiments demonstrated that stimulus generalization occurs using simple movements as stimuli. The phenomenon of the “peak shift? in post-discrimination generalization gradients was also examined. The first experiment demonstrated that a peak shift occurred using linear movements as stimuli and that the magnitude of the peak shift increased as the difference between the training stimuli decreased. The second experiment showed similar results when the stimuli consisted of a range of movements rather than a single movement length. The final experiment provided evidence that perception of movement length is influenced by the magnitude of an immediately preceding movement. The relevance of these studies to current motor-learning theory is discussed.     

Further evidence of a sensory-tonic interaction in pigeons

The five pigeons in Group 1 were given successive intradimensional discrimination training in which responses to a line of 49 degrees were reinforced on a variable-interval schedule and responses to a line of 33 degrees were not reinforced. Subsequent generalization testing with other line orientations revealed a peak shift from the positive stimulus in the direction away from the negative stimulus in all subjects. The four pigeons in Group 2 received successive discrimination training with the 49 degrees value on the key during both stimuli. During the negative stimulus, however, the floor was tilted 16 degrees counterclockwise. When tested (with the floor flat) these subjects showed peak shifts similar to those observed with Group 1. A third group of three pigeons, given successive interdimensional discrimination training with the 49 degrees line as the positive stimulus and the absence of the line as the negative, showed no peak shift in a subsequent generalization test. It was concluded that tilting the floor on which the pigeon stood systematically distorted the bird's visual perception of the orientation of the line in a manner consistent with the results of other studies in this laboratory.     

On the form of stimulus generalization curves for visual intensity

Twelve pigeons were given successive discrimination training involving variable-interval reinforcement for key pecking in the presence of one intensity of monochromatic light randomly alternated with extinction for pecking during another intensity. All of the pigeons were then tested in extinction for generalization along the intensity dimension, and all showed a displacement of maximal responding from the positive stimulus in the direction opposite the negative stimulus. For six of the pigeons, for which the test included only three values beyond the positive stimulus, four showed peaked gradients but two did not, showing monotonic gradients with maximal responding to the most extreme test value. For another six pigeons tested over a wider range, all showed peaked gradients. Thus, when a sufficiently wide range of test values is employed, generalization gradients for visual intensity have the same peaked form as do gradients for qualitative visual dimensions such as wavelength or line angle.     

Stimulus generalization, discrimination learning, and peak shift in horses.

Using horses, we investigated three aspects of the stimulus control of lever-pressing behavior: stimulus generalization, discrimination learning, and peak shift. Nine solid black circles, ranging in size from 0.5 in. to 4.5 in. (1.3 cm to 11.4 cm) served as stimuli. Each horse was shaped, using successive approximations, to press a rat lever with its lip in the presence of a positive stimulus, the 2.5-in. (6.4-cm) circle. Shaping proceeded quickly and was comparable to that of other laboratory organisms. After responding was maintained on a variable-interval 30-s schedule, stimulus generalization gradients were collected from 2 horses prior to discrimination training. During discrimination training, grain followed lever presses in the presence of a positive stimulus (a 2.5-in circle) and never followed lever presses in the presence of a negative stimulus (a 1.5-in. [3.8-cm] circle). Three horses met a criterion of zero responses to the negative stimulus in fewer than 15 sessions. Horses given stimulus generalization testing prior to discrimination training produced symmetrical gradients; horses given discrimination training prior to generalization testing produced asymmetrical gradients. The peak of these gradients shifted away from the negative stimulus. These results are consistent with discrimination, stimulus generalization, and peak-shift phenomena observed in other organisms.     

The effect of the blackout method on acquisition and generalization

In discrimination training with the Lyons' blackout method, pecks to the negative stimulus are prevented by darkening the chamber each time the subject approaches the negative stimulus. Stimulus generalization along a stimulus dimension was measured after training with this method. For comparison, generalization was also measured after reinforced responding to the positive stimulus without discrimination training, and after discrimination training by extinction of pecks to the negative stimulus. The blackout procedure and the extinction of pecks to the negative stimulus both produced a peak shift in the generalization gradients. The results suggest that after discrimination training in which the positive and negative stimulus are on the same continuum, the blackout method produces extinction-like effects on generalization tests.     

Simple and contingent adaptation effects for place of articulation in stop consonants

Experiments on selective adaptation have shown that the locus of the phonetic category boundary between two segments shifts after repetitive listening to an adapting stimulus. Theoretical interpretations of these results have proposed that adaptation occurs either entirely at an auditory level of processing or at both auditory and more abstract phonetic levels. The present experiment employed two alternating stimuli as adaptors in an attempt to distinguish between these two possible explanations. Two alternating stimuli were used as adaptors in order to test for the presence of contingent effects and to compare these results to simple adaptation using only a single adaptor. Two synthetic CV series with different vowels that varied the place of articulation of the consonant were employed. When two alternating adaptors were used, contingent adaptation effects were observed for the two stimulus series. The direction of the shifts in each series was governed by the vowel context of the adapting syllables. Using the single adaptor data, a comparison was made between the additive effects of the single adaptors and their combined effects when presented in alternating pairs. With voiced adaptors, only within-series adaptation effects were found, and these data were consistent with a on,level model of selective adaptation. However, for the voiceless adaptors, both within- and cross-series adaptation effects were found, suggesting the possible presence of two levels of adaptation to place of articulation. Further, the contingent adaptation effects with the voiceless adaptors seemed to be the result of the additive effects of the two alternating adaptors. This result indicates that previously reported contingent adaptation results may also reflect the net vowel specific adaptation effects after cancellation of other, nonvowel dependent effects and that caution is needed in interpreting such results.     

Stimulus factors in aversive controls: conditioned suppression after equal training to two stimuli

Pigeons trained to peck a key for food were periodically presented with tones ending with electrical shock until tone presentation consistently suppressed ongoing pecks. Shock was then discontinued and gradients of stimulus generalization were assessed by presenting tones with frequencies above, below, and at the frequencies of those used to develop conditioned suppression. When the training tones had frequencies at 670 and 1500 cps, resulting gradients were bi-modal with peak suppression at 670 and 1500 cps. Of the other test tones, 1000 cps produced the most suppression. When the training tones had frequencies at 450 and 2250 cps, bi-modal gradients were again obtained with peak suppression to the 450 and 2250 cps tones. Of the other test tones, 1000 cps produced the least suppression. These results support the hypothesis that generalized response tendencies summate.     

Stimulus generalization following extradimensional and intradimensional training in educable retarded children

Five related experiments investigating stimulus generalization following go/no-go discrimination training of educable retarded children are reported. Experiment 1 employed an Extradimensional paradigm in which generalization testing was on the hue dimension following training on an independent (orientation) dimension. Following True discrimination training only 25% of children showed a decremental stimulus generalization gradient on the hue dimension, though all children exhibited flat gradients in Pseudodiscrimination and S+ only control groups. An increase in difficulty of the orientation discrimination in Experiment 2 did not increase the number of decremental gradients. In Experiment 3, children who exhibited decremental gradients in Experiments 1 and 2 underwent further generalization testing with modified stimuli to establish a symmetrical gradient peaked at a hue S+ to be employed in Experiments 4 and 5. In these experiments an Intradimensional paradigm was employed with S+ and S? stimuli drawn from the hue dimension. Excitatory control by S+ and inhibitory control by S? were demonstrated, as were inhibitory consequences of S? such as peak and area shift.     

Peak shift revisited: a test of alternative interpretations

In Experiment 1, 2 groups of human subjects were trained to respond to 1 of 2 light intensity stimuli, S2 or S4, and then were tested for generalization with a randomized series of increasing values from S1 to S11. Both groups, including the group trained to respond to dimmer value, showed peak shifts to a brighter more centrally located test stimulus. In Experiment 2, which used line angle stimuli, both the size of the difference between S+ and S- and the range of test stimuli that extended beyond S+ were varied. The larger the S(+)-S- separation and the larger the range, the greater was the peak shift obtained. In Experiment 3, training involved an S- (line angle) surrounded by 2 S+ values with testing symmetrical about the training values and covering either a narrow or a wide range. The wide range produced greater peak shifts in both directions from S-. All 3 experiments support an adaptation-level interpretation of intradimensional discrimination learning and generalization test performance in human subjects. Related work with animals suggests the presence of similar processes.     

Two determinants of the peak shift in human voluntary stimulus generalization

Two hundred and forty college students were divided into two groups, with training stimuli (from the brightness dimension) selected to produce small and large adaptation level shifts between discrimination training (to respond “same” to S+ and “different” to S—) and gen-eralization testing. These were further divided into three groups with discriminations expected to yield positive (toward brighter values), negative (toward dimmer values), or zero post-discrimination peak shifts. Half the subjects received brief discrimination training while half received extended training. A further group of 60 subjects were given exposure to the stimuli comparable to that of the extended training subjects, but were asked to rate the stimuli instead of being given discrimination training. The results indicated that two independent, additive sources of shift were active. One source, occurring in all groups, was interpreted as being due to the change in adaptation level from training to test. The other source of shift, occurring only in the groups with extended discrimination training, was interpreted as due to the establishment of asymmetrical decision criteria; the more traditional interpretation in terms of the interaction between excitatory and inhibitory gradients of response strength was also considered.     

The peak shift in stimulus generalization: equivalent effects of errors and noncontingent shock

Terrace suggested that the peak shift in stimulus generalization occurs because the training stimulus not correlated with reinforcement has become aversive. This hypothesis is plausible in the light of instances where the peak shift is obtained compared with those where it fails to appear. The present experiment attempted to test implications of this hypothesis. Two groups of pigeons learned the same two-stimulus discrimination between colors by different training methods in a free-operant situation. When the discrimination was trained with many errors, a large peak shift was obtained in a subsequent generalization test of wavelength; after discrimination training with few errors, a negligible shift was observed. Half of each group then received noncontingent aversive shock during presentations of the stimulus not correlated with reinforcement in continued discrimination training. After this treatment, the errorless-shock subgroup showed a large peak shift and the error-shock subgroup tended to show a larger shift than before. Nonshocked control groups showed little change in the peak shift. It was concluded that pairing aversive shock with a stimulus not correlated with reinforcement is sufficient to produce or enhance a peak shift. In their effect on the peak shift, aversive shock and large amounts of nonreinforced responding appear to be equivalent.     

Stimulus generalization following extra-dimensional training in educationally subnormal (severely) children.

The use of discrimination learning paradigms in the study of attentional transfer is discussed. The technique of go/no-go discrimination learning followed by stimulus generalization testing is contrasted with the more familiar simultaneous learning paradigm followed by a shift in the relevant cues. In the former paradigm the effect of training a discrimination on one dimension on the slope of the stimulus generalization gradient on an independent gradient dimension (extra-dimensional training) is assessed. A steepening of the gradient relative to appropriate control procedures is taken as evidence of positive attentional transfer. The relevance of the technique to the detailed study of attentional transfer in educationally subnormal (severely) (ESN(S)) children is considered. In Expt. I nine ESN(S) children were trained in a go/no-go discrimination involving stimuli differing in orientation, and were generalization tested on a dimension that was orthogonal, namely hue. Of the six subjects who learnt the discrimination five showed clear decremental gradients on the hue dimension. In contrast a Pseudo-Discrimination group (PD) of eight subjects matched to those in the TD group showed no gradients. These subjects were not trained in the orientation discrimination, but were reinforced for responding on 50 per cent of each of the S+ and S- stimulus presentations. They thus received equal exposure to, but no differential training on, the orientation dimension. An S+ only group of four subjects who received no exposure to the orientation stimuli showed no gradients when stimulus generalization testing on the hue continuum was carried out. The result is discussed in terms of transfer deriving from stimulus control by relational aspects of the stimuli; in terms of control by constant irrelevant stimuli; and in terms of the study of stimulus control in ESN(S) children. In Expt. II the influence of the codability of the colours on the location of the peak of the stimulus generalization gradients in the TD group is investigated.     

Label training and auditory generalization

To investigate the Miller-Dollard hypothesis (Social learning and imitation, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1941) that verbal labels increase distinctiveness of cues, generalization gradients to pure tones were obtained before and after label training. One group was trained to label all seven tones in an array and another only the middle tone. Three additional groups controlled for nonverbal factors. Before training, gradients were characterized by progressive loss of stimulus control with exposure to the generalization test stimuli. The main effect of possession of labels was to retard this loss, but only in tests where S+ was a labeled stimulus. While the specificity of label effects was in line with the Miller-Dollard hypothesis, the finding that labels did not confer a clear advantage at the start of testing was not. It was suggested that the unlabeled stimuli may have been sufficiently distinct to mask label effects and that interference generated by the test stimuli reduced distinctiveness to levels needed for such effects to emerge.     

Generalization peak shift for autoshaped and operant key pecks.

Pigeons acquired discriminated key pecking between 528- and 540-nm stimuli by either a response-reinforcer (operant group) or a stimulus-reinforcer (autoshaped group) contingency, with other training-schedule parameters comparable over groups. For the birds in the operant group, key pecks intermittently produced grain in the presence of one hue on the key (positive stimulus) but not in the other (negative stimulus). For the birds in the autoshaped group, pecking emerged when grain was intermittently presented independently of key pecking during one key color but was not presented during the other key color. Two independent contingency assays, peck-location comparisons and elimination of differences in reinforcement rate, confirmed the effectiveness of the two training procedures in establishing operant or respondent control of key pecking. After reaching a 10:1, or better, discrimination ratio between key pecks during the two key colors, the birds received a wavelength generalization test. Criterion baseline key-peck rates were comparable for operant and autoshaped groups prior to testing. On the generalization test, performed in extinction, all birds pecked most at a stimulus removed from the positive training stimulus in the direction away from the negative stimulus. In testing, autoshaped "peak" rates (24.5 to 64.9 pecks per minute) were from 33% to 80% higher than rates in the presence of the training stimuli. Respondent peak shift rarely has been reported heretofore, and never this consistently and robustly. These results further confirm the similarity of perceptual processing in classical and operant learning. They are discussed in terms of Spence's gradient-interaction theory and Weiss' (1978) two-process model of stimulus control.     

Asymmetry of generalization decrement in causal learning

Two experiments required volunteers to learn which of various “planes” caused high levels of pollution. Novel test items were then rated as causes of pollution. Items created by adding novel features were rated at the same level as that of the original training items but items created by removing features received reduced ratings. This asymmetry of generalization decrement was not predicted by a well-known configural model of stimulus representation (Pearce, 1987, 1994) but was predicted by a recently proposed model of stimulus representation, the replaced-elements model (Brandon, Vogel, & Wagner, 2000).     

Generalization gradients following two-response discrimination training

Stimulus generalization was investigated using institutionalized human retardates as subjects. A baseline was established in which two values along the stimulus dimension of auditory frequency differentially controlled responding on two bars. The insertion of the test probes disrupted the control established to the two S^Ds during training. The discrimination was recovered between each test probe and the resulting gradients were stable across 10 test sessions. These gradients, supported by other two-response generalization studies, indicate that this type of two-response discrimination training divides the stimulus dimension into two functional classes separated by a region of transition from one class to the other. Each stimulus value in a class, which extends from an S^D outward to the functional limit of the dimension, controls a similar proportion of the two responses as each other value in the class. All values on the stimulus dimension control identical response rates with an absence of the usual generalization decrement. The latency of the initial response, however, shows a bimodal gradient with the modes at the S^D values.     

A comparison of generalization functions and frame of reference effects in different training paradigms

Six experiments were carried out to compare go/no-go and choice paradigms for studying the effects of intradimensional discrimination training on subsequent measures of stimulus generalization in human subjects. Specifically, the purpose was to compare the two paradigms as means of investigating generalization gradient forms and frame of reference effects. In Experiment 1, the stimulus dimension was visual intensity (brightness); in Experiment 2, it was line orientation (line-angle stimuli). After learning to respond (or to respond “right”) to stimulus value (SV) 4 and not to respond (or to respond “left”) to SV2 (in Experiment 1) or SV1 (in Experiment 2), the subjects were tested for generalization (recognition) with an asymmetrical set of values ranging from SV1 to SV11. Go/no-go training produced peaked gradients, whereas choice training produced sigmoid gradients. The asymmetrical testing resulted in a gradual shift of the peak of responding (go/no-go group) or in the point of subjective indifference (PSI; choice group) toward. the central value of the test series; thus, both paradigms revealed a frame of reference effect. The results were comparable for the quantitative (intensity) and the qualitative (line-angle) stimulus dimensions. Experiment 3 compared the go/no-go procedure with a yes/no procedure in which subjects responded “right” to SV4 and “left” to all other intensities and found no differences between these procedures. Thus the difference in gradient forms in go/no as opposed to (traditional) choice paradigms depends on whether one or two target stimuli are used in training. In Experiment 4, in which visual intensity was used, the shift in the PSI following choice training varied positively with the range of asymmetrical test stimuli employed. In Experiment 5, also with visual intensity, the magnitude of the peak shift following go/no-go training varied as a function of over representing a high or a low stimulus value during generalization testing. Experiment 6, with line angles, showed that the PSI following choice training varies in a similar way. The frame of reference effects obtained in these experiments are consistent with an adaptation-level model.     

A comparison of generalization functions and frame of reference effects in different training paradigms.

Six experiments were carried out to compare go/no-go and choice paradigms for studying the effects of intradimensional discrimination training on subsequent measures of stimulus generalization in human subjects. Specifically, the purpose was to compare the two paradigms as means of investigating generalization gradient forms and frame of reference effects. In Experiment 1, the stimulus dimension was visual intensity (brightness); in Experiment 2, it was line orientation (line-angle stimuli). After learning to respond (or to respond "right") to stimulus value (SV) 4 and not to respond (or to respond "left") to SV2 (in Experiment 1) or SV1 (in Experiment 2), the subjects were tested for generalization (recognition) with an asymmetrical set of values ranging from SV1 to SV11. Go/no-go training produced peaked gradients, whereas choice training produced sigmoid gradients. The asymmetrical testing resulted in a gradual shift of the peak of responding (go/no-go group) or in the point of subjective indifference (PSI; choice group) toward the central value of the test series; thus, both paradigms revealed a frame of reference effect. The results were comparable for the quantitative (intensity) and the qualitative (line-angle) stimulus dimensions. Experiment 3 compared the go/no-go procedure with a yes/no procedure in which subjects responded "right" to SV4 and "left" to all other intensities and found no differences between these procedures. Thus the difference in gradient forms in go/no as opposed to (traditional) choice paradigms depends on whether one or two target stimuli are used in training. In Experiment 4, in which visual intensity was used, the shift in the PSI following choice training varied positively with the range of asymmetrical test stimuli employed. In Experiment 5, also with visual intensity, the magnitude of the peak shift following go/no-go training varied as a function of overrepresenting a high or a low stimulus value during generalization testing. Experiment 6, with line angles, showed that the PSI following choice training varies in a similar way. The frame of reference effects obtained in these experiments are consistent with an adaptation-level model.