A Theory of Attention: Variations in the Associability of Stimuli with Reinforcement

According to theories of selective attention, learning about a stimulus depends on attending to that stimulus; this is represented in two-stage models by saying that subjects switch in analyzers as well as learning stimulusresponse associations. This assumption, however, is equally well represented in a formal model by the incorporation of a stimulus-specific learning-rate parameter, a, into the equations describing changes in the associative strength of stimuli. Theories of selective attention have also assumed (a) that subjects learn to attend to and ignore relevant and irrelevant stimuli (i.e., that a may increase or decrease depending on the correlation of a stimulus with reinforcement) and (b) that there is an inverse relationship between the probabilities of attending to different stimuli (i.e., that an increase in a to one stimulus is accompanied by a decrease in a to others). The first assumption is used to explain the phenomena of acquired distinctiveness and dimensional transfer, the second those of overshadowing and blocking. Although the first assumption is justified by the data, the second is not: Overshadowing and blocking are better explained by the choice of an appropriate rule for changing a, such that a decreases to stimuli that signal no change from the probability of reinforcement predicted by other stimuli.

[1]  N. J. Mackintosh,et al.  An Analysis of Overshadowing and Blocking , 1971 .

[2]  R. Rescorla Informational Variables in Pavlovian Conditioning , 1972 .

[3]  V. Lolordo,et al.  Attention in the pigeon: differential effects of food-getting versus shock-avoidance procedures. , 1973, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[4]  K. Lashley Brain Mechanisms and Intelligence: A Quantitative Study of Injuries to the Brain , 1965 .

[5]  B. Skinner,et al.  Principles of Behavior , 1944 .

[6]  K. Haberlandt,et al.  Stimulus selection in animal discrimination learning. , 1968, Journal of Experimental Psychology.

[7]  Suppression of learning about a hard cue by the presence of an easy cue , 1967 .

[8]  N. Mackintosh Blocking of conditioned suppression: role of the first compound trial. , 1975, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[9]  Anne Scott,et al.  International review of research in mental retardation , 1969 .

[10]  N. Mackintosh Further analysis of the overtraining reversal effect. , 1969, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[11]  T. J. Tighe,et al.  Subproblem Analysis of Discrimination Learning , 1973 .

[12]  N. Mackintosh,et al.  Mechanisms of animal discrimination learning , 1971 .

[13]  R. Lubow Latent inhibition. , 1973, Psychological bulletin.

[14]  C. C. Perkins The relation between conditioned stimulus intensity and response strength. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  David Zeaman,et al.  An Attention-Retention Theory of Retardate Discrimination Learning1 , 1973 .

[16]  N. Sutherland,et al.  Learning with one and two cues , 1967 .

[17]  D. Lawrence,et al.  Attention in Discrimination Learning , 1969 .

[18]  L. Kamin Predictability, surprise, attention, and conditioning , 1967 .

[19]  D. Lawrence Acquired distinctiveness of cues; transfer between discrimination on the basis of familiarity with the stimulus. , 1949, Journal of experimental psychology.

[20]  A. R. Wagner,et al.  CS habituation produces a “latent inhibition effect” but no active “conditioned inhibition” , 1972 .

[21]  Serial reversal training and nonreversal shift learning. , 1969, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[22]  D. Lawrence,et al.  The transfer of a discrimination along a continuum. , 1952, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[23]  R. Rescorla "Configural" conditioning in discrete-trial bar pressing. , 1972, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[24]  I. Krechevsky,et al.  "Hypotheses" in rats. , 1932 .

[25]  W. K. Honig,et al.  Fundamental issues in associative learning : proceedings of a symposium held at Dalhousie University, Halifax, June 1968 , 1969 .

[26]  N. Sutherland,et al.  Two-cue discrimination learning in rats. , 1966, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[27]  N. Mackintosh,et al.  Blocking as a Function of Novelty of CS and Predictability of UCS , 1971, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[28]  E. Fischer Conditioned Reflexes , 1942, American journal of physical medicine.

[29]  B. Shepp,et al.  INTRADIMENSIONAL AND EXTRADIMENSIONAL SHIFTS IN THE RAT. , 1964, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[30]  B. Campbell,et al.  Punishment and aversive behavior , 1969 .

[31]  L. J. Hammond,et al.  Configural conditioning: greater fear in rats to compound than component through overtraining of the compound. , 1971, Journal of experimental psychology.

[32]  A. M. Schrier,et al.  Consecutive intradimensional and extradimensional shifts in monkeys. , 1969 .

[33]  D. A. Riley,et al.  Multidimensional psychophysics and selective attention in animals. , 1976 .

[34]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  Effect of discrimination training on auditory generalization. , 1960, Journal of experimental psychology.

[35]  L. Stettner Effect of prior reversal and elimination of inhibition on the persistence of a discrimination despite subsequent equal reinforcement of the discriminanda. , 1965, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[36]  Learning to Ignore Irrelevant Stimuli: Variations within and between Displays , 1976 .

[37]  D. Lawrence Acquired distinctiveness of cues: selective association in a constant stimulus situation. , 1950, Journal of experimental psychology.

[38]  N. Sutherland,et al.  Effects of overtraining on intra-and extra-dimensional shifts , 1969 .

[39]  R. Lubow,et al.  Latent inhibition: the effect of nonreinforced pre-exposure to the conditional stimulus. , 1959, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[40]  J. Ward Theory of Attention. , 1918 .

[41]  C. B. Woodbury The learning of stimulus patterns by dogs. , 1943 .

[42]  Koch Sigmund Ed,et al.  Psychology: A Study of A Science , 1962 .

[43]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  Overshadowing in operant conditioning as a function of discriminability , 1973 .

[44]  M. D. Egger,et al.  When is a reward reinforcing? An experimental study of the information hypothesis. , 1963 .

[45]  K. Spence The nature of discrimination learning in animals. , 1936 .

[46]  R. Rescorla,et al.  A theory of Pavlovian conditioning : Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement , 1972 .

[47]  R L Mellgren,et al.  Transfer of Pavlovian differential conditioning to an operant discrimination. , 1969, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[48]  P. Schnur Selective attention: effect of element preexposure on compound conditioning in rats. , 1971, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[49]  Rescorla,et al.  [Psychology of Learning and Motivation] Volume 6 || Informational Variables in Pavlovian Conditioning , 1972 .

[50]  W. F. Prokasy,et al.  Classical conditioning : a symposium , 1965 .

[51]  N. Mackintosh EXTINCTION OF A DISCRIMINATION HABIT AS A FUNCTION OF OVERTRAINING. , 1963, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[52]  R. Rescorla Summation and retardation tests of latent inhibition. , 1971, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[53]  T. Waller Effect of irrelevent cues on discrimination acquisition and transfer in rats. , 1970, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[54]  G. Bower,et al.  Attention in Learning: Theory and Research , 1968 .

[55]  Michael Cole,et al.  Subproblem analysis of discrimination-shift learning , 1971 .

[56]  R. Benefield,et al.  Stimulus control, cue utilization, and attention: effects of discrimination training. , 1968, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[57]  A. Appignanesi,et al.  Compound conditioning: Elimination of the blocking effect , 1973 .

[58]  C. Halgren,et al.  Latent inhibition in rats: Associative or nonassociative? , 1974 .

[59]  J. Warren,et al.  Stimulus additivity and dominance in discrimination performance by cats. , 1961, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[60]  Noticing and responding in a discrimination based on a distinguishing element , 1973 .

[61]  N. J. Mackintosh,et al.  Stimulus selection: Learning to ignore stimuli that predict no change in reinforcement. , 1973 .

[62]  F. Logan A note on stimulus intensity dynamism. V. , 1954, Psychological review.

[63]  K. Spence,et al.  Essays in neobehaviorism : a memorial volume to Kenneth W. Spence , 1971 .