Abstract
Retrieval of a target association (A-B) is often impaired if training of a similar association is interpolated between target training and testing; this is known asretroactive interference. Two experiments, in which rats were used as subjects in a sensory preconditioning preparation, studied the associative nature of retroactive interference between antecedent events (i.e., A and C in the A-B, C-B paradigm) and between subsequent events (i.e., B and C in the A-B, A-C paradigm). With the present preparation, retroactive interference was equally strong between antecedent events and between subsequent events. Moreover, interference occurred only if (1) an association was trained in the interpolated phase and (2) the target and interpolated associations had a common element in a common temporal location.
Article PDF
References
Abra, J. C. (1967). Time changes in the strength of forward and backward associations.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,6, 640–645.
Asch, S. E., &Ebenholtz, S. M. (1962). The principle of associative symmetry.Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society,106, 135–163.
Bouton, M. E. (1993). Context, time, and memory retrieval in the interference paradigms of Pavlovian learning.Psychological Bulletin,114, 80–99.
Britt, S. H. (1935). Retroactive inhibition: A review of the literature.Psychological Bulletin,32, 381–440.
Cheung, C. G., &Goulet, L. R. (1968). Retroactive inhibition of R-S associations in the A–B, B–C, C–B paradigms.Journal of Experimental Psychology,76, 321–322.
Cole, R. P., Barnet, R. C., &Miller, R. R. (1995). Temporal encoding in trace conditioning.Animal Learning & Behavior,23, 144–153.
Escobar, M., Matute, H., &Miller, R. R. (2001). Cues trained apart compete for behavioral control in rats: Convergence with the associative interference literature.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,130, 97–115.
Heth, C. D. (1976). Simultaneous and backward fear conditioning in the rat.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,2, 117–129.
Honig, W. K. (1981). Working memory and the temporal map. In N. E. Spear & R. R. Miller (Eds.),Information processes in animals: Memory mechanisms (pp. 167–197). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Johnston, W. A. (1968). Bidirectional interference in an A-B, C-B paradigm.Journal of Verbal Leaning & Verbal Behavior,7, 305–311.
Johnston, W. A. (1969). The directionality of transfer and unlearning.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,8, 581–590.
Keppel, G., Bonge, D., Strand, B. Z., &Parker, J. T. (1971). Direct and indirect interference in the recall of paired associates.Journal of Experimental Psychology,88, 414–422.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement.Psychological Review,82, 276–298.
Matute, H., &Pineño, O. (1998a). Cue competition in the absence of compound training: Its relation to paradigms of interference between outcomes. In D. L. Medin (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 38, pp. 45–81). San Diego: Academic Press.
Matute, H., &Pineño, O. (1998b). Stimulus competition in the absence of compound conditioning.Animal Learning & Behavior,26, 3–14.
Matzel, L. D., Held, F. P., &Miller, R. R. (1988). Information and expression of simultaneous and backward associations: Implications for contiguity theory.Learning & Motivation,19, 317–344.
Miller, R. R., &Matzel, L. D. (1988). The comparator hypothesis: A response rule for the expression of associations. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 22, pp. 51–92). San Diego: Academic Press.
Neely, J. H. (1977). Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,106, 226–254.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927).Conditioned reflexes (G. V. Anrep, Trans.) London: Oxford University Press.
Pearce, J. M., &Dickinson, A. (1975). Pavlovian counterconditioning: Changing the suppressive properties of shock by association with food.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,104, 170–177.
Pearce, J. M., &Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian learning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli.Psychological Review,87, 532–552.
Petrich, J. A. (1970). S-R and R-S unlearning as a function of transfer paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology,83, 19–24.
Pineño, O., & Matute, H. (2001).Further evidence on the similarities between interference between cues and between outcomes. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Rescorla, R. A., &Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.),Classical conditioning II: Current theory and research (pp. 64–99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Savastano, H. I., &Miller, R. R. (1998). Time as content in Pavlovian conditioning.Behavioural Processes,44, 147–162.
Sherrington, C. S. (1947).The integrative action of the central nervous system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Slamecka, N. J., &Ceraso, J. (1960). Retroactive and proactive inhibition of verbal learning.Psychological Bulletin,57, 449–475.
Swenson, E. J. (1941).Retroactive inhibition: A review of the literature (University of Minnesota Studies in Education, Vol. 1). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Ward-Robinson, J., &Hall, G. (1996). Backward sensory preconditioning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,22, 395–404.
Ward-Robinson, J., &Hall, G. (1998). Backward sensory preconditioning when reinforcement is delayed.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,51B, 349–362.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Support for this research was provided by NIMH Grant 33881. We thank Raymond Chang, Daniel Choi, and Steven Stout for their comments on a preliminary version of this manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Escobar, M., Arcediano, F. & Miller, R.R. Conditions favoring retroactive interference between antecedent events (cue competition) and between subsequent events (outcome competition). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 8, 691–697 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196205
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196205