Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Generalization, Stimulus”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10Linked to original sources
PubMed1961

Stimulus generalization of conditioned suppression.

A tone ending in unavoidable electric shock was periodically presented to pigeons while they pecked a key for food. When pecking was completely disrupted by tone, shock was disconnected, and the training tone and tones having new frequencies were presented. Initially the gradient of generalization was broad; as testing proceeded, however, the gradient narrowed severely.

Animals↗
PubMed1967

Response patterning during stimulus generalization in the rat.

Nine rats were trained to bar press in the presence of a clicking sound of 6.67 cps (S(D)) for 1-min variable-interval food reinforcement randomly alternated with a clicking sound of 20 cps (S(Delta)) signifying extinction. After a criterion of 90% of total responses in the presence of the S(D) was obtained, a generalization test was administered, including values of 6.67, 10.00, 13.33, and 20.00 cps, with responses in the presence of the S(D) continuing to be reinforced during testing. The test yielded a gradient of response strength with rate highest in the presence of the S(D) and decreasing with increasing distance from this value. An interresponse time (IRT) analysis of responding during generalization testing revealed no systematic differences in modal IRT category or in median IRT to the different test stimuli. Mean IRT was lowest in the presence of the S(D) and increased systematically with increasing distance from this value, supporting the hypothesis that the generalization gradient of response rate is primarily the result of an increasing proportion of "long" IRT responses to stimuli increasingly distant from the S(D).

Animals↗
PubMed1971

Apparent movement and real movement detection in the pigeon: stimulus generalization.

Pigeons were trained to discriminate apparent movement and real movement in visual displays showing horizontal movement. Generalization testing on the dimension of directional movement yielded gradients that sloped as movement changed from horizontal to vertical. Evidence of generalization between apparent movement and real movement was found in equivalent response rates to training displays of either type. Extremely low response rates to training displays pulsating but showing no movement eliminated flicker as the basis of the discrimination.

Animals↗
PubMed1991

Stimulus generalization and equivalence classes: a model for natural categories.

Two three-member classes were formed by training AB and BC using a conditional discrimination procedure. The A and B stimuli were nonsense syllables, and the C stimuli were sets of "short" or "long" lines. To test for equivalence, C1 or C2 was presented as a sample with A1 and A2 as comparisons. Once the class-related comparison was chosen consistently, different line lengths were substituted for the training lines in the CA tests. In general, the likelihood of choosing a given comparison was an inverse function of the difference in the length of the test line from the training line. Stimuli in an equivalence class became functionally related not only to each other but also to novel stimuli that resembled a member of the equivalence class. The combination of primary generalization and equivalence class formation, then, can serve as a model to account for the development of naturally occurring categories.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Exemplar and prototype models revisited: response strategies, selective attention, and stimulus generalization.

J. D. Smith and colleagues (J. P. Minda & J. D. Smith, 2001; J. D. Smith & J. P. Minda, 1998,2000; J. D. Smith, M. J. Murray, & J. P. Minda, 1997) presented evidence that they claimed challenged the predictions of exemplar models and that supported prototype models. In the authors' view, this evidence confounded the issue of the nature of the category representation with the type of response rule (probabilistic vs. deterministic) that was used. Also, their designs did not test whether the prototype models correctly predicted generalization performance. The present work demonstrates that an exemplar model that includes a response-scaling mechanism provides a natural account of all of Smith et al.'s experimental results. Furthermore, the exemplar model predicts classification performance better than the prototype models when novel transfer stimuli are included in the experimental designs.

Attention↗