Simple and conditional visual discrimination with wheel running as reinforcement in rats.

Three experiments explored whether access to wheel running is sufficient as reinforcement to establish and maintain simple and conditional visual discriminations in nondeprived rats. In Experiment 1, 2 rats learned to press a lit key to produce access to running; responding was virtually absent when the key was dark, but latencies to respond were longer than for customary food and water reinforcers. Increases in the intertrial interval did not improve the discrimination performance. In Experiment 2, 3 rats acquired a go-left/go-right discrimination with a trial-initiating response and reached an accuracy that exceeded 80%; when two keys showed a steady light, pressing the left key produced access to running whereas pressing the right key produced access to running when both keys showed blinking light. Latencies to respond to the lights shortened when the trial-initiation response was introduced and became much shorter than in Experiment 1. In Experiment 3, 1 rat acquired a conditional discrimination task (matching to sample) with steady versus blinking lights at an accuracy exceeding 80%. A trial-initiation response allowed self-paced trials as in Experiment 2. When the rat was exposed to the task for 19 successive 24-hr periods with access to food and water, the discrimination performance settled in a typical circadian pattern and peak accuracy exceeded 90%. When the trial-initiation response was under extinction, without access to running, the circadian activity pattern determined the time of spontaneous recovery. The experiments demonstrate that wheel-running reinforcement can be used to establish and maintain simple and conditional visual discriminations in nondeprived rats.     

On the sampling interpretation of confidence intervals and hypothesis tests in the context of conditional maximum likelihood estimation

In the context ofconditional maximum likelihood (CML) estimation, confidence intervals can be interpreted in three different ways, depending on the sampling distribution under which these confidence intervals contain the true parameter value with a certain probability. These sampling distributions are (a) the distribution of the data given theincidental parameters, (b) the marginal distribution of the data (i.e., with the incidental parameters integrated out), and (c) the conditional distribution of the data given the sufficient statistics for the incidental parameters. Results on the asymptotic distribution of CML estimates under sampling scheme (c) can be used to construct asymptotic confidence intervals using only the CML estimates. This is not possible for the results on the asymptotic distribution under sampling schemes (a) and (b). However, it is shown that theconditional asymptotic confidence intervals are also valid under the other two sampling schemes. I am indebted to Theo Eggen, Norman Verhelst and one of Psychometrika's reviewers for their helpful comments.     

A parametric procedure for ultrametric tree estimation from conditional rank order proximity data

The psychometric and classification literatures have illustrated the fact that a wide class of discrete or network models (e.g., hierarchical or ultrametric trees) for the analysis of ordinal proximity data are plagued by potential degenerate solutions if estimated using traditional nonmetric procedures (i.e., procedures which optimize a STRESS-based criteria of fit and whose solutions are invariant under a monotone transformation of the input data). This paper proposes a new parametric, maximum likelihood based procedure for estimating ultrametric trees for the analysis of conditional rank order proximity data. We present the technical aspects of the model and the estimation algorithm. Some preliminary Monte Carlo results are discussed. A consumer psychology application is provided examining the similarity of fifteen types of snack/breakfast items. Finally, some directions for future research are provided.     

Development of conditional and equivalence relations without differential consequences

Two experiments were conducted to establish conditional stimulus relations without differential consequences and to test for the emergence of other relations. In Experiment 1, 3 adults responded to match-to-sample displays in which sample-comparison pairs were constant while the second comparison presented with each pair changed periodically across trials. No differential consequences followed any comparison selections. All subjects learned conditional relations between constant samples and comparisons, but results of tests for transitivity in those relations were equivocal. In Experiment 2, 4 children were given unreinforced training and testing similar to that provided to the adults in Experiment 1, with procedural refinements. One child learned conditional relations and demonstrated emergent relations that confirmed the development of two four-member equivalence classes. Another child learned the conditional relations but did not demonstrate any emergent relations reliably. A 3rd child, after reinforced training on two conditional relations, learned four new conditional relations without differential consequences and demonstrated symmetry but not equivalence in the trained relations. The 4th child did not learn the conditional relations. These findings emphasize the importance of careful construction of tests for stimulus equivalence and suggest a need for critical analyses of the apparent emergence of untrained stimulus relations on unreinforced tests that has been observed in several stimulus equivalence studies.     

Naming in conditional discrimination and stimulus equivalence.

Using a matching-to-sample procedure, McIntire, Cleary, and Thompson (1987) taught monkeys the conditional relations A1-R1-A1-R1, A2-R2-A2-R2, A1-R1-B1-R1, A2-R2-B2-R2, B1-R1-C1-R1, and B2-R2-C2-R2, where the first and third terms in each relation refer to the sample and comparison stimuli, respectively, and the second and last terms refer to the emission of a distinctive pattern of responding. The subjects were then tested for the emergent relations A-C, C-A, B-A, C-B, and B-B, with the differential response produced by a given stimulus during training also emitted on test trials (e.g., A1-R1-C1-R1). The performances of both subjects were as accurate on the tested relations as they had been on the trained relations. The new relations were characterized as demonstrations of stimulus equivalence. However, the conditional discrimination literature shows that such training procedures generate control of comparison selection by the differential response patterns. Therefore, no emergent relations were demonstrated because all of the trained response-stimulus relations were preserved on test trials. This paper suggests that these procedures do not provide an appropriate analogy for the kind of emergent stimulus-stimulus relations exhibited by human subjects in equivalence studies and outlines a paradigm for assessing the relative influence of stimulus-stimulus and response-stimulus relations.     

The Quantitative/Qualitative Watershed for Rules of Uncertain Inference

We chart the ways in which closure properties of consequence relations for uncertain inference take on different forms according to whether the relations are generated in a quantitative or a qualitative manner. Among the main themes are: the identification of watershed conditions between probabilistically and qualitatively sound rules; failsafe and classicality transforms of qualitatively sound rules; non-Horn conditions satisfied by probabilistic consequence; representation and completeness problems; and threshold-sensitive conditions such as ‘preface’ and ‘lottery’ rules. Special Issue Formal Epistemology I. Edited by Branden Fitelson     

Strict and random alternation in concurrent variable-interval schedules

Six pigeons responded on pairs of concurrent variable-interval schedules with, in different parts, four different arrangements of alternation between schedules. Following a single switching-key response, alternation was either strict or random, and the alternative presented after a switch (the postswitch alternative) was either signaled by the location of the switching key or unsignaled. Generalized-matching analyses showed little difference in behavior among the different alternation arrangements, except the usual finding of lower sensitivity of response allocation than time allocation was eliminated by arranging random alternation. Patterns of interchangeover times were similar for all arrangements except signaled random alternation. Differences in behavior preceding the different postswitch alternatives were found in the signaled random alternation procedure. Preference was biased towards the color of the signaled postswitch alternative and showed increased sensitivity when the postswitch alternative was to be the one with the higher reinforcer rate. Interchangeover times were substantially shorter when the postswitch alternative was signaled to be different from the current alternative than when it was signaled to be the same. However, when separate reinforcer ratios were calculated for the different postswitch alternatives, those effects were eliminated or greatly reduced. We suggest that, although behavior is indeed influenced by the postswitch alternative, the mechanism is indirect. That is, the distributions of reinforcers between alternatives obtained before each postswitch alternative differ when those alternatives are signaled, and those distributions are discriminated, but the same relations between choice and relative reinforcement hold irrespective of which postswitch alternative is signaled.     

条件推理中否定前件下信念偏差发生阶段的ERP研究

以日常生活中的条件推理语句为实验材料,采用大、小前提和结论依次呈现的“推断-判断”范式,利用事件相关电位(event-related brain potential, ERP)技术探讨了条件推理中否定前件下信念偏差效应的脑内时程动态变化。结果发现：在行为反应上,较信念促进,信念阻碍下的正确率更低反应时更长;在脑电上,两条件(信念阻碍和信念促进)诱发的ERP波形仅在大前提加工阶段出现明显的分离。这表明该推理下的信念偏差效应可能早在对大前提的语义表征阶段就已发生。     

Stimulus control and associative learning.

Interest in operant research on stimulus control has declined at the same time that much interest has burgeoned in nonoperant areas. Several examples of this shift toward traditional learning theory are considered, all of which have sponsored theoretical approaches that attempt to characterize the underlying associative units. These theoretical approaches are defended on the grounds that they have generated a deeper understanding of a variety of often puzzling phenomena. My projection is that future research will be determined even more strongly by theories about the structure of associations. Particular issues for which such discussion will have major impact include (1) whether conditional stimulus control is qualitatively different than simpler forms of stimulus control, (2) whether stimulus control is organized hierarchically, and (3) the origin of categories of stimulus equivalence.