Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T18:35:03.350Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Learned Changes in Stimulus Representations (A Personal History)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2014

Geoffrey Hall
Geoffrey Hall*
Affiliation:
University of York, UK
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr Geoffrey Hall, Department of Psychology, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Almost 40 years ago I began what turned out to be a programme of research on the way in which experience can change the effectiveness of the events used as stimuli in standard associative learning procedures. In this personal history I will describe my early (failed) attempts to find evidence for the acquired distinctiveness of cues, and my conclusion that experience tends to reduce, not enhance the associability of stimuli. I then go on to describe my attempts to square this conclusion with the stubborn empirical fact that, in some circumstances, pretraining with (or preexposure to) stimuli, can facilitate subsequent discrimination between them. I describe experiments (conducted mostly with rats as the subjects) showing how some of these effects can be explained in associative terms. Others, however, seemed to demand an explanation in terms of a new learning process that modulates the effective salience of stimuli. I go on to describe attempts to specify the nature of this process, and (bringing the story up to date) to describe recent experiments investigating the effects of salience modulation in human perceptual learning.

Hace casi 40 años, empecé lo que con el tiempo se convirtió en un programa de investigación sobre la forma en que la experiencia puede cambiar la efectividad de los eventos empleados como estímulos en procedimientos típicos de aprendizaje asociativo. En esta historia personal, describiré mis primeros (fallidos) intentos de demostrar la distintividad adquirida de las claves, y mi conclusión de que la experiencia tiende a reducir, en vez de a facilitar, la asociabilidad de los estímulos. Después paso a describir mis intentos de hacer compatible esta conclusión con el innegable hecho empírico de que, en algunas circunstancias, el pre-entrenamiento con (o la pre-exposición a) los estímulos puede facilitar la posterior discriminación entre ellos. Describo los experimentos (llevados a cabo con ratas como sujetos) que muestran cómo algunos de estos efectos pueden explicarse en términos asociativos. Sin embargo, otros parecen exigir una explicación en términos de un nuevo proceso de aprendizaje que modula la saliencia efectiva de los estímulos. Paso a describir los intentos de especificar la naturaleza de este proceso y (llegando al momento actual) a describir los experimentos recientes que investigan los efectos de modulación de la saliencia en el aprendizaje perceptual humano.

Keywords

associative learningstimulus discriminationpretrainingstimulis salienceperceptual learningaprendizaje asociativodiscriminación estimularpre-entrenamientosaliencia estimularaprendizaje perceptual
Type
Articles
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , November 2007 , pp. 218 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blair, C.A.J., & Hall, G. (2003). Perceptual learning in flavor aversion: Evidence for learned changes in stimulus effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 29, 39–48.Google ScholarPubMed
Blair, C.A.J., Wilkinson, A., & Hall, G. (2004). Assessments of changes in the effective salience of stimulus elements as a result of stimulus preexposure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 30, 317–324.Google ScholarPubMed
Bonardi, C., Graham, S., Hall, G., & Mitchell, C. (2005). Acquired distinctiveness and equivalence in human discrimination learning: Evidence for an attentional process. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 88–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Channell, S., & Hall, G. (1981). Facilitation and retardation of discrimination learning after exposure to the stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 7, 437–446.Google Scholar
Gibson, E.J. (1969). Perceptual learning and development. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Gibson, E.J., & Walk, R.D. (1956). The effect of prolonged exposure to visually presented patterns on learning to discriminate them. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 49, 239–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G. (1973). Overtraining and reversal learning in the rats: Effects of stimulus salience and response strategies. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 84, 169–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G. (1974). Transfer effects produced by overtraining in the rat. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 87, 938–944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G. (1979). Exposure learning in young and adult laboratory rats. Animal Behaviour, 27, 586–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G. (2003). Learned changes in the sensitivity of stimulus representations: Associative and nonassociative mechanisms. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56B, 43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G. (in press). Perceptual learning. In Byrne, J. (Ed.), Learning and memory: A comprehensive reference. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Hall, G., Blair, C.A.J., & Artigas, A.A. (2006). Associative activation of stimulus representations restores lost salience: Implications for perceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 32, 145–155.Google ScholarPubMed
Hall, G., Mitchell, C., Graham, S., & Lavis, Y. (2003). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness in human discrimination learning: Evidence for associative mediation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 266–276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, G., & Pearce, J.M. (1979). Latent inhibition of a CS during CS-US pairings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 5, 31–42.Google Scholar
Hall, G., & Pearce, J.M. (1982). Changes in stimulus associability during conditioning: Implications for theories of acquisition. In Commons, M.L., Herrnstein, R.J., & Wagner, A.R. (Eds.), Quantitative analyses of behavior, Vol. III: Acquisition (pp. 221–239). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
Honey, R.C., & Hall, G. (1989). Enhanced discriminability and reduced associability following flavor preexposure. Learning and Motivation, 20, 262–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honey, R.C., & Hall, G, (1989). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness of cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 15, 338–346.Google ScholarPubMed
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Kamin, L.J. (1968). “Attention-like” processes in classical conditioning. In Jones, M.R. (Ed.), Miami symposium on the prediction of behavior: Aversive stimulation (pp. 9–33). Coral Gable, FL: University of Miami PressGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, D.H. (1949). Acquired distinctiveness of cues: I. Transfer between discriminations on the basis of familiarity with the stimulus. Journal of Experimental Psychoogy, 39, 770–784.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Pelley, M.E., & McLaren, I.P.L. (2003). Learned associability and associative change in human causal learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56B, 68–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackintosh, N.J. (1969). Further analysis of the overtraining reversal effect. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, Monograph Supplement, 67, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mackintosh, N.J. (1975). A theory of attention: Variations in the associability of stimuli with reinforcement. Psychological Review, 82, 276–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaren, I.P.L, Kaye, H., & Mackintosh, N.J. (1989). An associative theory of the representation of stimuli: Applications to perceptual learning and latent inhibition. In: Morris, R.G.M. (Ed.), Parallel distributed processing: Implications for psychology and neurobiology (pp. 102–130). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, C., Kadib, R., Nash, S., Lavis, Y., & Hall, G. (in press). Analysis of the role of associative inhibition in perceptual learning by means if the same-different task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes.Google Scholar
Pearce, J.M., & Hall, G. (1979). Loss of associability by a compound stimulus comprising excitatory and inhibitory elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 5, 19–30.Google ScholarPubMed
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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherland, N.S., & Mackintosh, N.J. (1971). Mechanisms of animal discrimination learning. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Symonds, M., & Hall, G. (1995). Perceptual learning in flavor aversion learning: Roles of stimulus comparison and latent inhibition of common elements. Learning and Motivation, 26, 203–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar