Literature DB >> 12814194

The differential outcomes procedure can interfere or enhance operant rule learning.

Raddy Ramos1, Lisa M Savage.   

Abstract

The differential outcomes effect--the enhancement of learning and memory performance by correlating distinct reinforcers with to-be-remembered events (sample stimuli)--has been stated to be one of the most robust phenomena in learning psychology. However, in this paper we demonstrate that the correlation between unique samples and unique reinforcers can either interfere with or enhance learning a spatial matching-rule, dependent on whether these two processes are trained concurrently or sequentially. If the Pavlovian conditioning (unique sample-reward pairings) occurs before the matching rule is learned (sequentially), the conditioned expectations of unique rewards will enhance the acquisition of the spatial matching-rule in rats (the differential outcomes effect will be observed). However, if rats are required to learn the Pavlovian associations and the matching-rule concurrently, they are impaired in acquiring the spatial matching-rule. Thus, employing the differential outcomes procedure can either enhance or detract from learning and remembering the task rule-dependent on the nature of the task and order of training. These data suggest that under some circumstances learning Pavlovian associations can compete with the formation of instrumental behavior.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12814194     DOI: 10.1007/bf02734258

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Integr Physiol Behav Sci        ISSN: 1053-881X


  15 in total

1.  Memory enhancement in aged rats: the differential outcomes effect.

Authors:  L M Savage; S R Pitkin; J M Careri
Journal:  Dev Psychobiol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 3.038

2.  Control of response selection by reinforcer value requires interaction of amygdala and orbital prefrontal cortex.

Authors:  M G Baxter; A Parker; C C Lindner; A D Izquierdo; E A Murray
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2000-06-01       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 3.  Multiple brain-memory systems: the whole does not equal the sum of its parts.

Authors:  J J Kim; M G Baxter
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 13.837

4.  Two-factor learning theory reconsidered, with special reference to secondary reinforcement and the concept of habit.

Authors:  O H MOWRER
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1956-03       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Background stimuli and the inter-stimulus interval during Pavlovian conditioning.

Authors:  F J Odling-Smee
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol       Date:  1975-08       Impact factor: 2.143

6.  Hippocampal and nonhippocampal contributions to place learning in rats.

Authors:  R J McDonald; N M White
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 1.912

7.  Information acquired by the hippocampus interferes with acquisition of the amygdala-based conditioned-cue preference in the rat.

Authors:  R J McDonald; N M White
Journal:  Hippocampus       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 3.899

8.  A triple dissociation of memory systems: hippocampus, amygdala, and dorsal striatum.

Authors:  R J McDonald; N M White
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 1.912

9.  Rats exposed to acute pyrithiamine-induced thiamine deficiency are more sensitive to the amnestic effects of scopolamine and MK-801: examination of working memory, response selection, and reinforcement contingencies.

Authors:  L M Savage; S R Pitkin; K M Knitowski
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 10.  In search of the neurobiological underpinnings of the differential outcomes effect.

Authors:  L M Savage
Journal:  Integr Physiol Behav Sci       Date:  2001 Jul-Sep
View more
  2 in total

1.  Behavioral and associative effects of differential outcomes in discrimination learning.

Authors:  Peter J Urcuioli
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.986

Review 2.  Reward expectation alters learning and memory: the impact of the amygdala on appetitive-driven behaviors.

Authors:  Lisa M Savage; Raddy L Ramos
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 3.332

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.