Literature DB >> 3625104

Auditory discrimination: the Konorski quality-location effect.

J C Neill, J M Harrison.   

Abstract

Konorski showed that when a go/no-go procedure was used, sound quality discriminations were rapidly acquired and sound location discriminations were slowly acquired. These findings have been interpreted as a general constraint on the acquisition of auditory discriminations (quality-location effect). However, experiments carried out within an evolutionary framework (Harrison, 1984) have shown that the rate of acquisition of sound location discriminations varies widely as a function of the inclusion or exclusion of naturalistic features. These data suggest that Konorski's findings were a function of the special conditions of the experiments. The first purpose of the present experiments was to assess whether rats showed the effects noted by Konorski when studied under similar conditions. The second purpose was to study the effect of manipulating two natural features (novelty and stimulus-response adjacency) to assess whether the acquisition rates of quality and location discriminations could be greatly modified or made approximately equal, or both. When a go/no-go procedure was used and the other conditions were similar to those of Konorski, rats acquired a quality discrimination but did not acquire a location discrimination. However, when the S+ or S- were presented through a closely adjacent speaker, the sound location discrimination was acquired as rapidly as the quality discrimination. Finally, preexposing the animal to either S+ or S- retarded the rate of or prevented the acquisition of the quality discrimination. The experiments showed that the quality-location effect was determined primarily by the conditions used in Konorski's experiments, and that the effect is not a general constraint on learning.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3625104      PMCID: PMC1338745          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1987.48-81

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  38 in total

1.  Auditory sensitivity of the albino rat.

Authors:  J B Kelly; B Masterton
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1977-08

2.  Stimulus-response spatial contiguity vs. S-R spatial discontiguity in auditory spatial tasks. I. Acquisition by normal dogs.

Authors:  W Lawicka; J Szczechura
Journal:  Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars)       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 1.579

3.  Role of brainstem auditory structures in sound localization. I. Trapezoid body, superior olive, and lateral lemniscus.

Authors:  B Masterton; J A Jane; I T Diamond
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1967-03       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Control of responding by location of auditory stimuli: adjacency of sound and response.

Authors:  J M Harrison; S D Iversen; S R Pratt
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1977-11       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Qualitative versus directional cues in differential conditioning. I. Left leg-right leg differentiation to cues on a mixed character.

Authors:  C Dobrzecka; J Konorski
Journal:  Acta Biol Exp (Warsz)       Date:  1967

6.  The control of responding by sounds: unusual effect of reinforcement.

Authors:  J M Harrison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Auto-shaping or orienting?

Authors:  G Buzsáki; E Grastyán; P Molnár; I N Tveritskaya; J Haubenreiser
Journal:  Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars)       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 1.579

8.  Qualitative versus directional cues in two forms of differentiation.

Authors:  C Dobrzecka; G Szejkowska; J Konorski
Journal:  Science       Date:  1966-07-01       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Habituation and conditioning.

Authors:  P L Carlton; J R Vogel
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1967-04

10.  Auditory spatial responses of young guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) during and after ear blocking.

Authors:  M Clements; J B Kelly
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1978-02
View more
  9 in total

1.  Discussion of comments on "The representative animal".

Authors:  J M Harrison
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  1994

2.  Reply to Harrison: The representative method.

Authors:  I H Iversen
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  1994

3.  An inexpensive and automated method for presenting olfactory or tactile stimuli to rats in a two-choice discrimination task.

Authors:  Iver H Iversen
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Simultaneous auditory discrimination.

Authors:  J M Harrison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  J. Michael Harrison (1915-2007): a research career well lived.

Authors:  Henry Marcucella
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Control of responding by sounds of different quality: an evolutionary analysis.

Authors:  J M Harrison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Pilocarpine seizures cause age-dependent impairment in auditory location discrimination.

Authors:  John C Neill; Zhao Liu; Mohammad Mikati; Gregory L Holmes
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Pitch discrimination by ferrets for simple and complex sounds.

Authors:  Kerry M M Walker; Jan W H Schnupp; Sheelah M B Hart-Schnupp; Andrew J King; Jennifer K Bizley
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Relating approach-to-target and detection tasks in animal psychoacoustics.

Authors:  Joseph Sollini; Ana Alves-Pinto; Christian J Sumner
Journal:  Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 1.912

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.