Acquisition and forgetting in monkeys' memory of informational object-reward associations

The first experiment showed the monkeys could recall whether an object had been rewarded with peanuts or with sultanas, two equally preferred foods. The second investigated the effect of rewarded trials with an object on monkeys' ability to recall a nonrewarded trial with the same object. The third demonstrated that monkeys could use the memory of reward to predict nonreward and the memory of nonreward to predict reward, in a Win-Shift Lose-Stay paradigm. The fourth found differences between Win-Shift Lose-Stay and Win-Stay Lose-Shift in the rate at which associations between objects and reward events were forgotten. These results are discussed in relation to D. L. Medin's (In A. M. Schrier, Ed., Behavioral primatology, Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1977, Vol. I, pp. 33–69) distinction between informational and hedonic effects of reward in monkeys. It is argued that the association between an object and a reward event is represented in memory by many independent traces, different traces recording the object's association with different attributes of the reward event.     

Cognitive flexibility-rigidity, repetition effects, and memory

This experiment examined the role of cognitive flexibility-rigidity in memory. On the basis of several personality tests, subjects were classified as flexible, intermediate, or rigid, using a postexperimental blocking procedure. All subjects were given a perceptual grouping task, which masks the meaningful structure of the material. Subjects have the option of discovering the more meaningful structure consisting of word pairs, or alternatively, processing less meaningful chunks of letters. Results were that flexible subjects recalled substantially more items than intermediate and rigid subjects, in that order. In addition, subjects given different (varied) groupings of the letter chunks recalled substantially more than subjects given repeated presentations of the same grouping structure. Transfer tests indicated that subjects acquired different coding strategies under varied and constant input. Repetitious input led subjects to adopt inefficient strategies in processing the material to be remembered, whereas varied input led subjects to adopt efficient encoding strategies.     

Lateralization for reading musical chords: Disentangling symbolic, analytic, and phonological aspects of reading

It has been repeatedly shown that the left hemisphere (right visual field) is superior to the right hemisphere (LVF) in reading English, a bias possibly due to any or all of three confounded factors: (1) the symbolic nature of the coding system; (2) the analytic requirements of the decoding process; and (3) the phonological associations of the elements. Recent work on reading Japanese ideograms (Kanji) disentangles (1) from (2) and (3), but leaves the latter two confounded. We further disentangle (2) and (3) by examining visual field preference for reading musical chords, representatives of an analytic, nonphonological symbol system. The strong RVF advantage is interpreted as indicating that the left hemisphere is dominant for reading an analytic symbol system that is not phonologically based. We conclude that the left-hemisphere advantage traditionally found for reading phonological symbols is due to their analytic nature in addition to any effect due to their linguistic association.     

Introtacts as predictors of discrimination performance in kindergarten children

Kindergarten children were given simultaneous discrimination tasks with two irrelevant dimensions varying within settings. Prior to each block of eight feed-back trials, the children were asked to attempt to provide a statement of the solution. The introtacts thus provided were found to have several of the desirable characteristics that have been reported for older children with either introtact or blank-trial probes, but which have not been found previously for kindergarten children with the blank-trial probe. Classification of the children according to the trial block on which they first verbalized the correct relevant dimension was found to account for more than 60% of the total variability in discrimination performance. The introtacts were also used to assign parameters to theoretical prediction equations, with nearly two-thirds of the total variability in discrimination performance accounted for by the theory. Extension of the method to other models is discussed.     

Effects of differential reinforcement and task difficulty on preschoolers' compliance with teacher instructions

Preschool children in day schools were given instructions to complete certain tasks. Four tasks were given of two types and two levels of difficulty. In each condition compliance with at most one instruction (one task) was reinforced. In two similar experiments, with six children, general results were: compliance with easy tasks was maintained without reinforcement when any task compliance was reinforced; compliance for hard tasks remained high only when that specific task was reinforced. Thus, generalization of compliance with instructions varied with task difficulty. The setting and procedure for both studies were designed to reduce possible coercive features of laboratory studies of generalized performance. Results show generalized performance can occur under naturalistic conditions. The effect of effort, as a response characteristic affecting generalized performance, is discussed.     

Between-theory and within-theory conflict in explaining context effects in impression formation

Research on context effects in impression formation has taken the form of testing competing predictions from the averaging model and the meaning shift model. This between-theory conflict has been unprofitable because neither theory has yet acquired the degree of specificity necessary to generate unequivocal predictions in this area. The research has been useful, however, in identifying each theory's capacity to generate self-contradictory predictions. Future research on this topic can most profitably be addressed to resolving these within-theory conflicts.     

Preference for shock signals as a function of the temporal accuracy of the signals

Three groups of rats were exposed to pairs of three different contingencies on two sides of a shuttlebox. One signaled contingency provided 10-min danger and safety cues plus an additional 10-sec cue immediately preceeding shock (P-S), another signaled contingency provided 10-min danger and safety cues but random 10-sec cues with respect to shock (R-S), and an unsignaled contingency provided no safety period, but only a 20-min danger period during which shock could occur (NS). Signaled P-S and R-S contingencies were preferred in a choice test to the unsignaled NS contingency, and P-S was preferred to R-S. Independent tests of the fear-eliciting properties of the cues made in an off-baseline test of suppression of ongoing exploration indicated more freezing (fear) to the 10-sec cue in rats experiencing the P-S contingency. The results were interpreted as indicating a preference for cues providing more precise information about the temporal location of shock even when those cues were fear-eliciting.     

The sensory basis of avoidance responding in the rat : Relative dominance of auditory or visual warning signals and safety signals

Three experiments determined the relative degree of stimulus control exerted by the elements of a compound auditory-visual stimulus when this stimulus was presented in various temporal relationships to a barpress avoidance response. When the compound discriminative stimulus for barpress avoidance responding consisted of onset of white noise and onset of either light or darkness, the white noise always exerted dominant control. When the compound discriminative stimulus consisted of offset of white noise and onset of light, neither element controlled avoidance responding. On the other hand, when a barpress avoidance response produced a compound feedback stimulus consisting of onset of white noise and onset of either light or darkness, the visual element always exerted dominant control. When the compound feedback stimulus consisted of offset of white noise and onset of light, both elements exerted stimulus control.