Clipperton-Allen Amy, Cole Mark, Peck Margaux, Quirt Julie
Department of Psychology, Huron University College, University of Western Ontario, 1349 Western Road, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 1H3.
Department of Neuroscience, Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Learn Behav. 2016 Dec;44(4):378-389. doi: 10.3758/s13420-016-0231-4.
In 4 experiments, rats searched for food located on top of 4 of 16 towers which were arranged in a 4 × 4 matrix. The location of the baited towers was cued by visual landmark cues (the baited towers were striped, the others white) and by pattern cues (the baited towers were located in a 2 × 2 pattern within the larger 4 × 4 matrix) or simply by pattern cues without visual landmark cues. In 3 of the experiments, visual cues, after being paired with pattern cues, were removed altogether (Experiment 1), put into competition with pattern cues (Experiment 2), or made noninformative (Experiment 3). In Experiment 4, it was the pattern cues that were made noninformative. Collectively, the data suggest strongly that whereas the pattern is learned, even when presumably more salient visual cues are present, the connection between pattern and food location is much weaker than that between visual cue and food location. These data are more easily explained by a model of learning that includes dedicated modules than by a single-system associative model.
在4个实验中,大鼠要在以4×4矩阵排列的16座塔中的4座塔顶寻找食物。有诱饵的塔的位置由视觉地标线索(有诱饵的塔有条纹,其他的是白色)和图案线索(有诱饵的塔在更大的4×4矩阵内呈2×2图案排列)来提示,或者仅由图案线索提示而没有视觉地标线索。在3个实验中,视觉线索在与图案线索配对后,被完全移除(实验1),与图案线索竞争(实验2),或变得无信息价值(实验3)。在实验4中,是图案线索变得无信息价值。总体而言,数据有力地表明,尽管图案是习得的,即使可能存在更显著的视觉线索,图案与食物位置之间的联系也比视觉线索与食物位置之间的联系弱得多。这些数据用一个包含专用模块的学习模型比用单系统联想模型更容易解释。