Abstract
The acquisition of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response to a tone + light compound and its components was examined as a function of the CS-US interval (Experiment 1) and CS duration (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, responding to the compound attained high levels in all groups, but responding on component test trials declined to low levels as the CS-US interval increased across values of 300, 800, and 1,300 msec. Further disparities between the compound and components appeared when the animals were shifted to a positive patterning schedule. In Experiment 2, disparities between the compound and components increased as the duration of the CS was increased across values of 50, 200, and 800 msec within a fixed CS-US interval of 800 msec. The results are discussed with respect to distributive processes, configuration, and speed-accuracy tradeoffs.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baker, T. W. (1972). Component dynamics within compound stimuli. In R. F. Thompson & J. F. Voss (Eds.),Topics in learning and performance (pp. 85–103). New York: Academic Press.
Barto, A. G. (Ed.) (1984).Simulation experiments with goal-seeking adaptive elements. (AFWAL-TR-84-1022). Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Avionics Laboratory, Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories.
Barto, A. G., Anderson, C. W., &Sutton, R. S. (1982). Synthesis of nonlinear control surfaces by a layered associative search network.Biological Cybernetics,43, 175–185.
Bellingham, W. P., &Gillette, K. (1981). Spontaneous configuring to a tone-light compound using appetitive training.Learning & Motivation,12, 420–434.
Bellingham, W. P., Gillette-Bellingham, K., &Kehoe, E. J. (1985). Summation and configuration in patterning schedules with the rat and rabbit.Animal Learning & Behavior,13, 152–164.
Chisholm, D. C., Hupka, R. B., &Moore, J. W. (1969). Auditory differential conditioning of the rabbit nictitating membrane response. II. Effects of interstimulus interval and cue similarity.Psychonomic Science,15, 125–126.
Frey, P. W. (1969). Differential rabbit eyelid conditioning as a function of age, interstimulus interval, and cue similarity.Journal of Experimental Psychology,81, 326–333.
Gormezano, I. (1966). Classical conditioning. In J. B. Sidowski (Ed.),Experimental methods and instrumentation in psychology (pp. 385–420) New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gray, T., &Lethbridge, D. A. (1976). Configurai conditioning in the CER: Loss of element strength after repeated reinforced compound CS trials.Learning & Motivation,7, 532–539.
Hartman, T. F., &Grant, D. A. (1962). Differential eyelid conditioning as a function of the CS-US interval.Journal of Experimental Psychology,64, 131–136.
Heinemann, E. G., &Chase, S. (1975). Stimulus generalization. In W. K. Estes (Ed.),Handbook of learning and cognitive processes: Vol. 2. Conditioning and behavior theory (pp. 305–349). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Holland, P. C., &Block, H. (1983). Evidence for a unique cue in positive patterning.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,21, 297–300.
Hull, C. L. (1943).Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Hull, C. L. (1945). The discrimination of stimulus configurations and the hypothesis of neural afferent interaction.Psychological Review,52, 133–139.
Kamin, L. J. (1969). Selective association and conditioning. In N. J. Mackintosh & F. W. K. Honig (Eds.),Fundamental issues in associative learning (pp. 42–64). Halifax: Dalhousie University Press.
Kehoe, E. J. (1982). Overshadowing and summation in compound stimulus conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,8, 313–328.
Kehoe, E. J. (1986). Summation and configuration in conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response to compound stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,12, 186–195.
Kehoe, E. J., Feyer, A., &Moses, J. L. (1981). Second-order conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response as a function of the CS2-CS1 and CS1-US intervals.Animal Learning & Behavior,9, 304–315.
Kehoe, E. J., &Gormezano, I. (1980). Configuration and combination laws in conditioning with compound stimuli.Psychological Bulletin,87, 351–378.
Kehoe, E. J., &Schreurs, B. G. (1986). Compound conditioning of the rabbit nictitating membrane response: Test trial manipulations.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,24, 79–81.
Konorski, J. (1967).Integrative activity of the brain: An interdisciplinary approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lamb, M. R., &Riley, D. A. (1981). Effects of element arrangement on the processing of compound stimuli in pigeons (Columba livid)Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,7, 45–58.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variation in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement.Psychological Review,82, 276–298.
Moore, J. W., &Stickney, K. J. (1980). Formation of attentional-associative networks in real time: Role of the hippocampus and implications for conditioning.Physiological Psychology,8, 207–217.
Pearce, J. M., &Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli.Psychological Review,87, 532–552.
Razran, G. (1965). Empirical codifications and specific theoretical implications of compound-stimulus conditioning: Perception. In W. F. Prokasy (Ed.),Classical conditioning (pp. 226–248). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Razran, G. (1971).Mind in evolution. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Rescorla, R. A. (1972). “Configurai” conditioning in discrete-trial bar pressing.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,79, 307–317.
Rescorla, R. A. (1973). Evidence for the “unique stimulus” account of configurai conditioning.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,85, 331–338.
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 (pp. 64–99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., &Williams, R. J. (1985).Learning internal representations by error propagation (ICS Tech. Rep. No. 8506). San Diego: University of California, Institute for Cognitive Science.
Saavedra, M. A. (1975). Pavlovian compound conditioning in the rabbit.Learning & Motivation,6, 314–326.
Scandrett, J., &Gormezano, I. (1980). Microprocessor control and A–D data acquisition in classical conditioning.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,12, 120–125.
Schneiderman, N. (1966). Interstimulus interval function of the nictitating membrane response in the rabbit under delay versus trace conditioning.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,62,391–402.
Sutherland, N. S., &Mackintosh, N. J. (1971).Mechanisms of animal discrimination learning. New York: Academic Press.
Sutton, R. S., &Barto, A. G. (1981). Toward a modern theory of adaptive networks: Expectation and prediction.Psychological Review,88, 135–171.
Vandercar, D. H., &Schneiderman, N. (1967). Interstimulus interval functions in different response systems during classical discrimination conditioning of rabbits.Psychonomic Science,9, 9–10.
Whitlow, J. W., &Wagner, A. R. (1972). Negative patterning in classical conditioning. Summation of response tendencies to isolable and configurai components.Psychonomic Science,27, 299–301.
Wickens, D. D., Nield, A. F., Tuber, D. S., &Wickens, C. D. (1970). Classically conditioned compound-element discrimination as a function of length of training, amount of testing and CS-UCS interval.Learning & Motivation,1, 95–109.
Young, D. B., &Pearce, J. M. (1984). The influence of generalization decrement on the outcome of a feature-positive discrimination.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,36B, 331–352.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant A28315236 from the Australian Research Grants Committee.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kehoe, E.J., Schreurs, B.G. Compound-component differentiation as a function of CS-US interval and CS duration in the rabbit’s conditioned nictitating membrane response. Animal Learning & Behavior 14, 144–154 (1986). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200049
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200049