Selective attentional responses and overtraining in a discrimination shift paradigm

Peed and Forehand's conclusion that “a theory of vicarious consequences based upon an informational analysis of imitation has serious limitations” is questioned on several grounds. In addition to the fact that Peed and Forehand's research design is not sufficiently sensitive to warrant accepting the null hypothesis, a review of recent literature suggests that the effects Liebert and Fernandez originally predicted from an informational analysis have been obtained by other investigators. Finally, studies in which an informational heuristic has been employed in areas of observational learning other than vicarious consequences attest further to its usefulness in stimulating discovery.