Support for a theory of memory for event duration must distinguish between test-trial ambiguity and actual memory loss

Staddon and Higa's (1999) trace-strength theory of timing and memory for event duration can account for pigeons' bias to "choose short" when retention intervals are introduced and to "choose long" when, following training with a fixed retention interval, retention intervals are shortened. However, it does not account for the failure of pigeons to choose short when the intertrial interval is distinct from the retention interval. That finding suggests that stimulus generalization (or ambiguity) between the intertrial interval and the retention interval may result in an effect that has been attributed to memory loss. Such artifacts must be eliminated before a theory of memory for event duration can be adequately tested.     

DISCRIMINATION ACQUISITION IN CHILDREN WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES UNDER IMMEDIATE AND DELAYED REINFORCEMENT

We evaluated the discrimination acquisition of individuals with developmental disabilities under immediate and delayed reinforcement. In Experiment 1, discrimination between two alternatives was examined when reinforcement was immediate or delayed by 20 s, 30 s, or 40 s. In Experiment 2, discrimination between 2 alternatives was compared across an immediate reinforcement condition and a delayed reinforcement condition in which subjects could respond during the delay. In Experiment 3, discrimination among 4 alternatives was compared across immediate and delayed reinforcement. In Experiment 4, discrimination between 2 alternatives was examined when reinforcement was immediate and 0‐s or 30‐s intertrial intervals (ITI) were programmed. For most subjects, discrimination acquisition occurred under immediate reinforcement. However, for some subjects, introducing delays slowed or prevented discrimination acquisition under some conditions. Results from Experiment 4 suggest that longer ITIs cannot account for the lack of discrimination under delayed reinforcement.     

RELATIONS AMONG ACUTE AND CHRONIC NICOTINE ADMINISTRATION,SHORT-TERM MEMORY,AND TACTICS OF DATA ANALYSIS

Emerging evidence suggests that nicotine may enhance short‐term memory. Some of this evidence comes from nonhuman primate research using a procedure called delayed matching‐to‐sample, wherein the monkey is trained to select a comparison stimulus that matches some physical property of a previously presented sample stimulus. Delays between sample stimulus offset and comparison stimuli onset are manipulated and accuracy is measured. The present research attempted to systematically replicate these enhancement effects with pigeons. In addition, the effects of nicotine were assessed under another, more dynamic, memory task called titrating‐delay matching‐to‐sample. In this procedure, the delay between sample offset and comparison onset adjusts as a function of the subject's performance. Correct matches increase the delay, mismatches decrease the delay, and titrated delay values serve as the primary dependent measure. Both studies examined nicotine's effects under acute and chronic administration. Neither provided clear or compelling evidence of memory enhancement following nicotine administration despite reliable and systematic dose‐related changes in response latency measures. A modest dose‐related effect on accuracy was found, but the magnitude of the effect appears to be directly related to tactics of data analysis involving best‐dose analyses of a very circumscribed subset of trial types.     

Study for now,but judge for later: Delayed judgments of learning promote long‐term retention

Larsson Sundqvist, M., Todorov, I., Kubik, V. & Jönsson, F.U. (2012) Study for now, but judge for later: Delayed judgments of learning promote long‐term retention. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 53, 450–454. Delayed judgments of learning (JOL) are assumed to be based on covert retrieval attempts. A common finding is that testing memory during learning improves later retention (i.e., the testing effect), and even more so than an equivalent amount of study, but only after a longer retention interval. To test the assertion that also delayed JOLs improve memory, the participants either studied Swahili‐Swedish word pairs four times, or they both studied (two times) and performed delayed JOLs (two times) alternately. Final cued recall test were given after either five minutes or one week. Results showed a reliable learning‐group by retention‐interval interaction, with less forgetting in the group that alternated between studying and making JOLs. The results are discussed in relation to the self‐fulfilling prophecy account of Spellman and Bjork (1992) , and in terms of study advice, the results further underscore the importance of delaying JOLs when studying and evaluating one’s ongoing learning.     

On the development and mechanics of delayed matching-to-sample performance

Despite its frequent use to assess effects of environmental and pharmacological variables on short-term memory, little is known about the development of delayed matching-to-sample (DMTS) performance. This study was designed to examine the dimensions and dynamics of DMTS performance development over a long period of exposure to provide a more secure foundation for assessing stability in future research. Six pigeons were exposed to a DMTS task with variable delays for 300 sessions (i.e., 18,000 total trials; 3,600 trials per retention interval). Percent-correct and log-d measures used to quantify the development of conditional stimulus control under the procedure generally and at each of five retention intervals (0, 2, 4, 8 and 16-s) individually revealed that high levels of accuracy developed relatively quickly under the shorter retention intervals, but increases in accuracy under the longer retention intervals sometimes were not observed until 100-150 sessions had passed, with some still increasing at Session 300. Analyses of errors suggested that retention intervals induced biases by shifting control from the sample stimulus to control by position, something that was predicted by observed response biases during initial training. These results suggest that although it may require a great deal of exposure to DMTS prior to obtaining asymptotic steady state, quantification of model parameters may help predict trends when extended exposure is not feasible.     

反馈时间、反馈类型和掩蔽类型对概率类别学习的影响

通过操纵反馈时间(即时,延迟)、反馈类型(简单,丰富)和掩蔽类型(塔罗牌,空白矩形),考察概率类别学习的学习机制。结果发现:(1)被试的学习成绩在即时反馈条件下显著优于在延迟反馈条件下;(2)在即时反馈条件下,仅给予简单反馈,被试虽能出色地完成天气预报任务,但是不能正确地判断卡片预测晴天的概率,倾向内隐学习;(3)在其他条件下,被试能正确地判断卡片预测晴天的概率以及各卡片在天气预报任务中预测天气的重要程度,表明被试能外显地意识到这些线索的作用。综上,概率类别学习采用的是双系统学习机制,既依赖内隐学习,又依赖外显学习。     

Direct remembering,mediated remembering,and atypical forgetting functions

Atypical forgetting functions have been demonstrated in several recent studies of delayed matching to sample, in which experimental conditions are altered partway through the retention interval. The forgetting functions are atypical in that accuracy or discriminability is not always a negatively accelerated monotonic function of increasing retention interval duration, but may increase at later times in the retention interval. Atypical forgetting functions reflect changes in levels of discrimination. A switch from a lower level to a higher level of discrimination, or vice versa, can occur at any time in the retention interval. The behavioral theories of remembering proposed by Nevin, Davison, Odum, and Shahan (2007), and White and Brown (2014), offer quantitative predictions of forgetting functions that differ in intercept or slope. Both theories are able to account for atypical forgetting functions, by assuming time‐independent changes in the mediating effect of attending to sample and comparison stimuli (in Nevin et al.'s model) or in the direct effect of the context of reinforcement of the conditional discrimination (in White & Brown's model). Despite differences in their main assumptions, the theories have an edge over any theory that assumes that forgetting is time‐dependent.     

Response acquisition by zebrafish (Danio rerio) with delayed reinforcement

Zebrafish (Danio rerio) is a common vertebrate animal model in biomedical research and is a promising species for studying how genes interact with environmental factors in determining behavior. The present study investigated how reinforcement parameters affect zebrafish behavior by assessing response acquisition with delayed reinforcement, which has been studied with other species (e.g., rats, pigeons, humans, etc.) but not with zebrafish. Twenty‐four experimentally naïve subjects were exposed to a tandem fixed‐ratio 1 differential‐reinforcement‐of‐other‐behavior x‐s schedule of reinforcement, where x varied across subjects. There were six different delay‐to‐reinforcement durations and sets of four fish were assigned to each delay duration. All of the fish assigned to a 0‐, 0.5‐, or 1‐s delay acquired responding. Two fish acquired responding with a 3‐s delay and one fish appeared to have acquired it with a 6‐s delay although the latter result was less clear. None acquired responding with a 12‐s delay. These results suggest that zebrafish behavior is sensitive to delays to reinforcement and the time frame over which reinforcement is effective may be limited approximately to 6 s. This time frame is shorter than that found with other species. Practical and theoretical implications of the present finding are discussed.