Lachnit H, Kimmel H D
University of Giessen, West Germany.
Pavlov J Biol Sci. 1990 Oct-Dec;25(4):174-9.
Eastern and Western interpretations of contextual control of phasic conditional responses (transswitching) are contrasted. The Eastern (Asratyan, 1965) approach emphasizes the role of the tonic conditional stimulus and the (hypothetical) tonic response it evokes. The Western (Lachnit, 1986) approach emphasizes the role of compound conditional stimuli. Although Lachnit showed that transswitching-like results can be obtained without a tonic stimulus, attempts to simulate transswitching experiments using a computer model of the Rescorla-Wagner theory (Kimmel and Lachnit, 1988) have shown that predictions from the theory approximate empirical results in human classical conditioning only when the tonic stimulus is given far greater weight than the phasic stimulus. In other words, only when the Rescorla-Wagner theory is made more like Asratyan's theory, can the compound conditional stimulus approach account for real empirical transswitching data.
本文对比了东西方对相位条件反应(转换)情境控制的解释。东方(阿斯腊强,1965年)的方法强调强直条件刺激及其引发的(假设的)强直反应的作用。西方(拉赫尼特,1986年)的方法强调复合条件刺激的作用。尽管拉赫尼特表明,在没有强直刺激的情况下也能获得类似转换的结果,但使用雷斯克拉-瓦格纳理论的计算机模型(金梅尔和拉赫尼特,1988年)模拟转换实验的尝试表明,只有当强直刺激比相位刺激的权重高得多时,该理论的预测才接近人类经典条件作用中的实验结果。换句话说,只有当雷斯克拉-瓦格纳理论更接近阿斯腊强的理论时,复合条件刺激方法才能解释实际的转换实验数据。