 Pearce et al. (2006, Experiment 1) found potentiation of geometry learning by a feature in a rectangular enclosure, and overshadowing of geometry by.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Theories of Learning Chapter 4 – Theories of Conditioning
Advertisements

Lectures 14: Instrumental Conditioning (Basic Issues) Learning, Psychology 5310 Spring, 2015 Professor Delamater.
Chance REORIENTATION BY SLOPE CUES IN HUMANS Introduction Daniele Nardi, Amanda Y. Funk, Nora S. Newcombe & Thomas F. Shipley Temple University Animals.
Using prosody to avoid ambiguity: Effects of speaker awareness and referential context Snedeker and Trueswell (2003) Psych 526 Eun-Kyung Lee.
Neural Correlates of Variations in Event Processing during Learning in Basolateral Amygdala Matthew R. Roesch*, Donna J. Calu, Guillem R. Esber, and Geoffrey.
Theories of Classical Conditioning
Estimating Rats’ Working Memory Capacity in an Object Recognition Foraging Task Jerome Cohen, Xue Han, Anca Matei, Vara Parameswaran Department of Psychology,
Memory Development Psychology Introduction When you think of developmental questions, typically, you think of kids When you think of developmental.
Neurosciences John Evenden Varieties of Impulsivity: Evidence from Animal Studies John Evenden Dept of Neurosciences AstraZeneca R & D Wilmington Wilmington,
Models with Discrete Dependent Variables
Inhibitory Pavlovian Conditioning Stimuli can become conditioned to signal the absence of a US— such learning is called Inhibitory Conditioning CS+ = excitatory.
Lecture 18&19: Stimulus Control (Pavlovian & Instrumental) Learning, Psychology 5310 Spring, 2015 Professor Delamater.
Lectures 7&8: Pavlovian Conditioning (Determining Conditions) Learning, Psychology 5310 Spring, 2015 Professor Delamater.
Developing Stimulus Control. Peak Shift Phenomena where the peak of the generalization curve shifts AWAY from the S- – Means that the most responding.
PSY402 Theories of Learning
Chapter 11: Sequential Clinical Trials Descriptive Exploratory Experimental Describe Find Cause Populations Relationships and Effect Sequential Clinical.
Motion and Ambiguity Russ DuBois. Ambiguity = the possibility to interpret a stimulus in two or more ways Q: Can motion play a part in our interpretation.
The Problem of Transposition Behavioral Versus Cognitive Views of Learning Key Issue in Learning Theory: What is Learned? Behavioral View: An association.
PSY 402 Theories of Learning Chapter 4 – Theories of Conditioning.
PSY 402 Theories of Learning Chapter 8 – Stimulus Control Space and Time in Humans and Animals.
PSY 402 Theories of Learning Chapter 9 – Motivation.
Discrimination-Shift Problems Background This type of task has been used to compare concept learning across species as well as across a broad range of.
25 Sept 07 FF8 - Discrete Choice Data Introduction Tony O’Hagan.
PLANOMETRIC VIEW OF A KITCHEN.
From Mechanisms of Memory, second edition
This Week: Testing relationships between two metric variables: Correlation Testing relationships between two nominal variables: Chi-Squared.
A vanishing sex difference Effects of environmental contingencies in a virtual Morris water task on male and female spatial navigation Mühl, Griego, Kabisch,
Lectures 12 & 13: Pavlovian Conditioning (Learning-Performance) Learning, Psychology 5310 Spring, 2015 Professor Delamater.
CHAPTER 4 Pavlovian Conditioning: Causal Factors.
Reinforcement learning This is mostly taken from Dayan and Abbot ch. 9 Reinforcement learning is different than supervised learning in that there is no.
Early Arbitrary Object Memory May Set the Stage for Episodic Memory in Toddlers Frances Balcomb, Nora S. Newcombe, Katrina Ferrara, Jule Grant, Sarah M.
Correlational Research Chapter Fifteen Bring Schraw et al.
Thinking! Psychology 2606 Some introductory thoughts We are clearly the most cognitively complex animals on this planet We are clearly the most cognitively.
School of Information - The University of Texas at Austin LIS 397.1, Introduction to Research in Library and Information Science LIS Introduction.
Animated banners - H1 Sigurbjörn Óskarsson. Research design Repeated measures N=32 (- 1 outlier) Task testing Control category + 3 levels of experimental.
One Point Perspective Design and Technology. One Point Perspective Task 3 Here are some high quality examples of what we are aiming to produce by the.
Geometry 9-6 Geometric Probability. Example Find the probability that a point chosen randomly in the rectangle will be: Inside the square. 20 ft 10 ft.
Determinants of Olfactory Memory Span in Rats MacQueen, D. A., Bullard, L. A., & Galizio, M. University of North Carolina Wilmington Introduction Dudchenko,
The Relationship Between Geometric Shape and Slope for the Representation of a Goal Location in Pigeons (Columba livia) Daniele Nardi Bowling Green State.
Factors Influencing Conditioning  CS and US Intensity, and Attention to the CS  Temporal relationship  Predictiveness  Preparedness  Redundancy 1.
Children Getting Lost: Language, space, and the development of cognitive flexibility in humans.
Experimental Psychology PSY 433
Geometric vs Featural Processing: Are They Lateralized in Humans? Stephanie E Tanninen and David R Brodbeck Department of Psychology, Algoma.
Extinction of Conditioned Behavior Effects of Extinction  the rate of responding decreases  response variability increases  experiment by Neuringer,
Lectures 9&10: Pavlovian Conditioning (Major Theories)
PSY 402 Theories of Learning Chapter 8 – Stimulus Control Space and Time in Humans and Animals.
Blocking The phenomenon of blocking tells us that what happens to one CS depends not only on its relationship to the US but also on the strength of other.
Memory Development Psychology Introduction When you think of developmental questions, typically, you think of kids However, your memory changes.
Unit 1 Review 1. To say that learning has taken place, we must observe a change in a subject’s behavior. What two requirements must this behavioral change.
Tests after a significant F
Extinction of Conditioned Behavior Chapter 9 Effects of Extinction Extinction and Original Learning What is learned during Extinction.
Strategies for answering multiple choice questions Don’t be chicken to answer!
Chapter 6 LEARNING. Learning Learning – A process through which experience produces lasting change in behavior or mental processes. Behavioral Learning.
Ch. 15 S. 2 Measuring Achievement, Abilities, and Interests Obj: Explain how achievement tests, aptitude tests, and interest inventories are used.
Memory Mechanisms One. Spatial Memory The ability to remember the position or location of objects and places. – important in foraging for food in the.
Rescorla-Wagner Model  US-processing model  Can account for some Pavlovian Conditioning phenomena: acquisition blocking unblocking with an upshift conditioned.
PSY402 Theories of Learning
Jian-Zhong Xiang, Malcolm W Brown  Neuron 
Volume 27, Issue 23, Pages e4 (December 2017)
Learning Psychology /29/2018.
Pavlovian Conditioning: Mechanisms and Theories
Space Psychology 3926.
Decoding Cognitive Processes from Neural Ensembles
Volume 27, Issue 23, Pages e4 (December 2017)
Stephanie Lidd and Jamie Tauber
Volume 27, Issue 3, Pages (February 2017)
PSY402 Theories of Learning
Volume 92, Issue 2, Pages (October 2016)
Encoding of Stimulus Probability in Macaque Inferior Temporal Cortex
Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages (April 2016)
Presentation transcript:

 Pearce et al. (2006, Experiment 1) found potentiation of geometry learning by a feature in a rectangular enclosure, and overshadowing of geometry by the feature in a kite-shaped enclosure. Both groups had an innately attractive feature at an incorrect corner. This experiment indirectly shows the important difference between geometrically ambiguous and unambiguous enclosures. In an ambiguous enclosure, such as a rectangle, attractive features at any corner increase the perceived reward contingency of the correct geometry by increasing the probability of choosing the correct over the rotational corner. This leads to potentiation.  In an unambiguous enclosure like the kite, an attractive feature at an incorrect corner increases the number of errors, leading to overshadowing of the correct geometry.  The interactions between features and geometry depend on the shape of the enclosure and the locations of the features. Features at the same locations enhance learning about each other, whether this learning is excitatory or inhibitory.  The model predicts that subjects trained in a rectangular enclosure with four distinct features at the corners (as in Cheng, 1986), will prefer, if tested in a square enclosure (no geometric information), the feature that was at the near corner to the feature that was at the rotational corner, even though neither was paired with a reward during training.  The model also predicts the results of experiments comparing features of differing sizes (e.g. Goutex et al., 2001) and ones that span whole walls (Graham et al., 2006; Sovrano et al., 2003), multiple features (Cheng, 1986), the effects of enclosure size (e.g. Vallortigara et al., 2005), and varying shape (Tommasi & Polli, 2004), and touchscreen versions of geometry tasks (Kelly & Spetch, 2004).  This model is a general model of operant discrimination learning and choice. It predicts opposite results in an operant task to those found by Wagner et al. (1968) in a Pavlovian discrimination vs. pseudo-discrimination task. An Associative Model of Geometry Learning Noam Miller & Sara Shettleworth University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada How the model solves the puzzle References Blocking and potentiation in the watermaze Animals can learn to use the shape or geometry of an enclosure to locate a hidden goal (review in Cheng & Newcombe, 2005). Remarkably, more informative features in the enclosure don’t seem to block or overshadow geometry learning and may even potentiate it, supporting Cheng’s idea of a “geometric module” impenetrable to other spatial information. But spatial learning in an arena or watermaze is an operant task. By taking this into account, our model shows how underlying competitive learning between geometry and other cues, as in the Rescorla-Wagner (RW) model, determines observed spatial choices in geometry and other instrumental learning tasks. In this example of a geometry learning task, disoriented subjects are required to locate a reward hidden in one corner of a rectangular enclosure marked by a prominent feature. The best predictor of the reward’s location is obviously the feature, but animals also learn the geometry, and such learning is not blocked by prior training with the feature, e.g. in a square enclosure (Wall et al., 2004). This happens because the animal’s behavior, not the a priori predictiveness of the cues, determines their frequency of presentation. Subjects only learn about cues when they visit corners containing those cues. Choice of what corner to visit is determined by the associative strength of cues at each corner relative to the total of associative strengths at all corners. In the situation shown above, subjects quickly develop a preference for the corner with the predictive feature. But when they visit that corner they also experience a pairing of its geometry with reward, leading the associative strength of the correct geometry to increase more than it would have without a feature at the correct corner. Thus, the feature enhances learning about geometry rather than overshadowing it. Because strong preferences in the model can develop long before associative strengths are asymptotic, prior training does not block geometry, as shown below in a comparison of model and data from Wall et all The puzzle of geometry learning Miller, N. Y., & Shettleworth, S. J.(in press). Learning about environmental geometry: An associative model. JEP:ABP. (pdf available from How the model works There are several cues that the subject can learn to use to locate the reward: the geometry of the corners, the feature, and other contextual cues. Each of these is a cue in the model: G(eometry), F(eature), C(ontext), W(rong geometry). When a subject visits a corner and experiences reward or nonreward there, the cues at that corner change in strength as in RW: (1)ΔV = α β (λ – ΣV), If subjects’ choices of search locations are based on what they have already learned about the various cues at each corner, the probability of choosing a location (P L ) should be dependent on the associative strengths of the cues at that location (V L ). We define: (2) P L = V L / ΣV L, and modify the original equation so that subjects only learn about a cue when they visit a location that contains it: (3) ΔV = α β (λ – ΣV) P L. When visiting a rewarded corner, λ = 1; when visiting an unrewarded corner, λ = 0. An additional term is added to the above equation for each corner that a cue is present at. So, in our example, for the correct geometry (G), which is present at both the correct and rotational corners, the equation would become: (4) ΔV G = α G β (1 – V GFC ) P Corr + α G β (0 – V GC ) P Rot. In a watermaze, subjects are usually permitted to swim until they locate the platform. Thus, the probability of visiting the correct corner on a given trial is always 1 but there is also some non-zero probability of visiting each of the other corners along the way. The model accounts for multiple-choice paradigms by taking into account the cumulative probability of each of the possible paths the subject can take to the platform. Pearce et al. (2001) trained rats in an unambiguous triangular watermaze with the platform at one of the corners along the base. Group Beacon had a beacon attached Other predictions to the platform, which was always in the same corner; group None had no beacon; group Random had a beacon and platform that moved randomly between the correct and incorrect corners from trial to trial. Here we show how the model correctly predicts the results of a test trial with no beacon present for any of the groups. For such a test, predicted choice proportions are based on relative associative strengths of the cues other than the beacon. C N F R