Irrelevant incentive learning revisited: Associating flavors and exteroceptive cues with positive incentives

In “irrelevant incentive learning” information stored about an incentive when it is not desired is used later when the incentive is desired. In “habit learning” responses learned under one motive state continue to be made under a new motive state even though they produce goal events that are not appropriate to that motive state. Experiment 1 showed that both types of learning occur simultaneously whether flavor or texture cues are used and whether or not position is also a relevant cue. Thus, contrary to previous suggestions, irrelevant incentive learning is not limited to interoceptive cues, nor is habit learning limited to exteroceptive cues. In both Experiments 1 and 2 it was also shown that motivation affects what is learned as well as affecting current performance. This contrasts with views of motivation as solely a determinant of performance.     

Does recognition memory improve with age?

In order to test the hypothesis that recognition is a developmentally stable component of the memory system, age differences in recognition of faces were examined while controlling for nonmemory factors that might contribute to differences between the groups. Three groups of children (mean ages: 3 years, 4 months; 4 years, 9 months; and 6 years, 11 months) and a group of college students were tested on a recognition task and a similar matching task. The results indicated no change in recognition across the preschool years but an improvement from the later preschool period to the first grade. Further analyses indicated that this improvement was not due to changes in decision criteria or perceptual skills. These findings call into question the view that recognition is a developmentally invariant component of the memory system.     

A case of adult onset of stuttering

A 36-yr-old adult male was treated for stuttering after a “sudden onset” of disfluency according to the client, 3 yr before. The treatment method and results are described and the “awareness” feature of stuttering onset is discussed.     

A partial resolution of the paradox of interference: The role of integrating knowledge

It has been noted that models of memory that posit retrieval interference imply that the more one knows about a topic, the harder it is to retrieve any one of these facts. Smith, Adams, and Schorr (Cognitive Psychology, 1978, 10, 438–464) regard this to be a paradox and postulate that people use world knowledge to integrate various facts about a concept and thereby avoid interference. Exploring this issue further in two experiments we discovered that integration of facts alleviates interference only when a person can perform his memory task by simply making a consistency judgment and can avoid the need to retrieve a specific fact. When foils force subjects to retrieve the specific assertion, the interference occurs among integrated facts as among unrelated facts. It appears that, when possible, subjects will judge whether they have seen a fact simply by judging if it is related to (consistent with) a theme they have studied. In other words, people judge themes rather than facts. Consistent with this interpretation, we found interference among themes; that is, the more themes were associated with a concept, the greater the interference.     

Evaluating the stage learning hypothesis

A procedure for evaluating the Genevan stage learning hypothesis is illustrated by analyzing Inhelder, Sinclair, and Bovet's (Learning and the development of cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press 1974) guided learning experiments. The method is a chi-square-based model fitting strategy which enables comparisons to be made among different models. The method eschews critical measurement problems and is easily implemented. There appears little evidence for the Genevan position, although failure to report critical data and sample size considerations makes definitive evaluation of the Genevan position difficult. Suggestions for future research are proposed.     

Knowledge of one's own responding and the relation of such knowledge to learning: A developmental study

First-, third-, fifth-grade children, and college students (ages 6, 8, 10, and 19 years) acquired a paired-associate list under the study-test procedure to a one error-less trial criterion. In addition, as each pair was presented the individual indicated whether he/she had that pair correct on the immediately preceding trial (postdiction responses). The data were interpreted in terms of a discrimination-utilization hypothesis which postulates that individuals discriminate their own correct and incorrect responses on a given trial and use this information for distributing processing effort on the subsequent trial. Analyses involving the accuracy of postdiction responses, the relation of postdiction accuracy to acquisition, and the consideration of the acquisition data in terms of a two-stage model led to the conclusion that older children and adults may use the discrimination-utilization strategy but younger children tend not to use it, probably because of both mediation and production deficiencies.     

Primary and secondary reinforcers as distinctive cues which acquire information value in partial-reinforcement discrimination training

To assess the cue as opposed to incentive effect of reward, rats were trained on an easy visual discrimination with food contingent on 50 or 100% of the correct responses, and white-noise contingent on 0, 50 or 100% of these responses. Additionally, the 50% food and noise schedules were structured for different groups to produce positive, zero, or negative correlations of the two events. Although the addition of noise did not affect learning with 100% food, the slower learning observed with 50% food was increasingly offset by greater percentages of noise, with the 50% groups showing faster learning under the negative than zero correlation and faster under the zero than positive correlation. Together with supporting speed data, these results indicate that a “neutral” stimulus can be substituted for food with little loss in performance. Consequently, the reinforcing effect of food is attributed in part to its function as a cue which, like noise, can increase the discriminability of the alternatives and provide information about the correctness of the response.