{"title":"经典条件反射中不同特征-目标间隔的时间分辨。","authors":"E J Kehoe, K G Boesenberg","doi":"10.3758/bf03192830","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a typical conditional discrimination, a target stimulus (X) is reinforced during one feature cue (A-->X+), but not during another feature cue (B-->X-). The present experiments used only a single \"feature\" cue (a 66-sec tone). On half of the trials, the target stimulus (a 400-msec light) was paired with the reinforcer when the feature-target interval was one duration (e.g., 5 sec). On the remaining trials, the interval was different (e.g., 45 sec), and the target stimulus was presented without the reinforcer. All the animals acquired this temporal discrimination, and subsequent testing with other feature-target intervals yielded generalization-like gradients. These results provide solid evidence that each portion of a feature cue is encoded in a distinctive fashion. Had temporal encoding not occurred, the feature cue would have been just as ambiguous a predictor of the reinforcer as was the target stimulus, and discrimination would not have been possible. The integration of real-time temporal encoding mechanisms into models of conditional discrimination is discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":7824,"journal":{"name":"Animal Learning & Behavior","volume":"30 3","pages":"208-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3758/bf03192830","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Temporal discrimination using different feature--target intervals in classical conditioning of the rabbit's nictitating membrane response.\",\"authors\":\"E J Kehoe, K G Boesenberg\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/bf03192830\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In a typical conditional discrimination, a target stimulus (X) is reinforced during one feature cue (A-->X+), but not during another feature cue (B-->X-). The present experiments used only a single \\\"feature\\\" cue (a 66-sec tone). On half of the trials, the target stimulus (a 400-msec light) was paired with the reinforcer when the feature-target interval was one duration (e.g., 5 sec). On the remaining trials, the interval was different (e.g., 45 sec), and the target stimulus was presented without the reinforcer. All the animals acquired this temporal discrimination, and subsequent testing with other feature-target intervals yielded generalization-like gradients. These results provide solid evidence that each portion of a feature cue is encoded in a distinctive fashion. Had temporal encoding not occurred, the feature cue would have been just as ambiguous a predictor of the reinforcer as was the target stimulus, and discrimination would not have been possible. The integration of real-time temporal encoding mechanisms into models of conditional discrimination is discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7824,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Animal Learning & Behavior\",\"volume\":\"30 3\",\"pages\":\"208-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3758/bf03192830\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Animal Learning & Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03192830\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal Learning & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03192830","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Temporal discrimination using different feature--target intervals in classical conditioning of the rabbit's nictitating membrane response.
In a typical conditional discrimination, a target stimulus (X) is reinforced during one feature cue (A-->X+), but not during another feature cue (B-->X-). The present experiments used only a single "feature" cue (a 66-sec tone). On half of the trials, the target stimulus (a 400-msec light) was paired with the reinforcer when the feature-target interval was one duration (e.g., 5 sec). On the remaining trials, the interval was different (e.g., 45 sec), and the target stimulus was presented without the reinforcer. All the animals acquired this temporal discrimination, and subsequent testing with other feature-target intervals yielded generalization-like gradients. These results provide solid evidence that each portion of a feature cue is encoded in a distinctive fashion. Had temporal encoding not occurred, the feature cue would have been just as ambiguous a predictor of the reinforcer as was the target stimulus, and discrimination would not have been possible. The integration of real-time temporal encoding mechanisms into models of conditional discrimination is discussed.