Alleviation of forgetting of discrimination learning

Reactivation treatments intended to alleviate forgetting in rats were tested in two discrimination tasks—instrumental learning with brightness or with spatial location as the discriminanda. For memories acquired 28 days earlier, forgetting was alleviated with both tasks when testing was preceded by certain reactivation treatments. Therefore, the generality of the effectiveness of reactivation treatments for alleviating forgetting is extended to include discrimination learning and response measures other than go, no-go behavior.     

Alleviating forgetting of active shock-avoidance by apparently unrelated food presentations

A series of four experiments investigated why forgetting of an active shock-avoidance response was reduced when an apparently unrelated appetitive experience occurred both prior to avoidance training and during the retention interval between training and testing. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated the reliability of the phenomenon and found that a sufficient condition for the effect was the presentation of food from a pellet dispenser (not an operant response per se). Experiment 3 demonstrated that the effect was not the result of enhanced activity. Experiment 4 showed that forgetting was still reduced when the appetitive experience occurred only prior to active avoidance or only during the retention interval. The results are discussed in regard to the reinstatement of the reinforcer representation.     

Forgetting of recently acquired or recently reactivated memories

Four experiments compared the rates of forgetting following acquisition of a conditioned aversion and following a reactivation treatment given long after conditioning had been completed. The “reactivation treatment” consisted of a single presentation of the unconditioned stimulus, a procedure known to reinstate, following substantial forgetting, the behavior seen immediately after conditioning. It was first determined that the decrement in performance 1, 3, or 7 days later tended to be more rapid just after original conditioning than following a reactivation treatment given 27 days after conditioning. Subsequent experiments confirmed that the forgetting seen 3 or 7 days after original conditioning was in fact greater than forgetting 3 or 7 days after the reactivation treatment that had followed conditioning by 27 days; also, tests permitted rejection of the hypothesis that this effect could be attributed to nonassociative (systemic) consequences of the conditioning situation. Finally, tests indicated that retention 24 hr after a reactivation treatment was significantly better if the reactivation treatment followed conditioning by 27 days than if it were given just 3 min or 24 hr after conditioning. The central observation emerging from this study, that forgetting is more rapid following original learning than following a temporally remote reactivation treatment, was discussed in terms of potential interactions between the age (or accessibility) of a memory and processes that might be instigated by a reactivation treatment.     

Effects of performance expectancies created by peer comparison as related to social reinforcement,task difficulty,and age of child

Children in kindergarten-first grades and fourth-sixth grades (6 and 10 years of age, respectively) participated in one of two experiments and performed either a simple motor task or (for older children only) a two-choice simultaneous discrimination task at two difficulty levels. Children received either positive, negative, or no peer comparison statements (describing how other children their age had allegedly performed) and either praise, silence (in Experiment 2 only), or criticism on a fixed-interval 20-second schedule throughout the task. Young children were more responsive to adult evaluation of their performance than to peer comparison. Expectancies created by peer comparisons affected older children's motor performance most if they received reinforcement contrary to the expectancy. In situations requiring greater cognitive ability, older children, particularly boys, responded to the performance expectancies created by positive peer comparison. Older boys, compared with older girls, seemed to be more sensitive to peer comparison and social reinforcement.