Martins Ana P G, Miller R M, Capaldi E J
Department of Psychological Sciences, School of Liberal Arts, Purdue University, 703 Third Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2081, USA.
Anim Cogn. 2008 Jan;11(1):59-66. doi: 10.1007/s10071-007-0084-5. Epub 2007 Apr 17.
In Experiment 1 each rat received two different fixed series of three trials each. The unconditioned stimulus occurred on Trial 1 of one series and on Trial 3 of the other series, all other trials being nonreinforced. Previous Pavlovian investigations have shown that rats can remember the immediately prior reward outcome and anticipate the immediately subsequent reward outcome. Experiment 1 demonstrated that rats could remember and anticipate even more remote reward outcomes. In Experiment 2 two groups received a series of two nonrewarded trials followed by a rewarded trial. It was demonstrated that a change in the conditioned stimulus (CS) from Trial 2 to Trial 3, which occurred in one group, produced weaker responding than in the other group that did not experience such CS change. On the basis of these findings it was suggested that the rats organized the trials of a series into a unit or chunk. This was concluded for two reasons. First, remembering and anticipating remote reward outcomes strongly suggests that responding is being controlled by events extending beyond the current trial. Secondly, the experimental manipulations employed in the Pavlovian situation here are similar to those used in prior human learning and animal instrumental learning investigations concerned with chunking. Thus, it would appear that chunking is a ubiquitous phenomenon appearing in human serial learning (e.g., Bower and Winzenz 1969; Crowder 1976), in animal instrumental learning (e.g., Capaldi 1992; Hulse and Dorsky 1977; Terrace 1987), and now in Pavlovian learning.
