Transfer of Conditioned Discrimination with CR- Relevant and CS- Irrelevant Evocative Stimuli when the UCS Contingency of CS Negation was Transferred Or Reversed |
From inside the book
Results 1-3 of 8
Page 3
... Bunde's MA thesis ( 1969 ) which was reported as one of two ex- periments by Bunde , Grant & Frost ( 1970 ) . Bunde used as differential conditioned stimuli the words BLINK and DON'T BLINK . When BLINK was al- ways reinforced by being ...
... Bunde's MA thesis ( 1969 ) which was reported as one of two ex- periments by Bunde , Grant & Frost ( 1970 ) . Bunde used as differential conditioned stimuli the words BLINK and DON'T BLINK . When BLINK was al- ways reinforced by being ...
Page 16
... Bunde's Results .-- An important purpose of this experiment was to test the replicability of Bunde's ( 1970 ) results when he varied compatibility of negation with the relevant evocative stimuli , BLINK , DON'T BLINK . Figure 1 , Panels ...
... Bunde's Results .-- An important purpose of this experiment was to test the replicability of Bunde's ( 1970 ) results when he varied compatibility of negation with the relevant evocative stimuli , BLINK , DON'T BLINK . Figure 1 , Panels ...
Page 35
... Bunde's Results In contrast to the results of Bunde's experiment , which showed that with relevant evocation , incompatibility of negation degraded dis- crimination only for the Vs who were unable to suppress their responses to CS ...
... Bunde's Results In contrast to the results of Bunde's experiment , which showed that with relevant evocation , incompatibility of negation degraded dis- crimination only for the Vs who were unable to suppress their responses to CS ...
Common terms and phrases
ABCD air puff Analysis of Variance Appendix appropriate CR Blocks in Training Blocks in Transfer Blocks of Transfer Bunde C-CA Classical Conditioning Column compatibility of negation contain the data control groups CRs to CS+ CS-UCS contingency DB+ DJ df MS F differential conditioned stimuli differential stimuli Discrimination Scores DON'T BLINK DON'T JUMP EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS Experimental Treatments eyelid CR F A Relevance Grant groups trained Hickok incompatible negation initial transfer irrelevant to CR JUMP+ Last Two Ten-Trial Latency of Response Mean Latency msec negation reversal negation transfer nonspecific transfer Panels PERCENT CRS poor discrimination pretransfer training Relevance of Evocation response bias Response Topography S/ABCD Specific Trans STIMULI TRAINING TRANSFER Table Ten-Trial Blocks tion training and transfer training phase transfer of conditioned transfer phase Transfer Source df transfer stage Transfer Type transferred to BLINK Trial Blocks Variance Unweighted Means verbal conditioned stimuli