Transitive Inference Remains Despite Overtraining on Premise Pair C+D

Overview

Journal Front Psychol

Date 2018 Oct 19

PMID 30333770

Citations 4

Authors

Hector O Camarena

Oscar Garcia-Leal

Jose E Burgos

Felipe Parrado

Laurent Avila-Chauvet

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Transitive inference (TI) has been studied in humans and several animals such as rats, pigeons and fishes. Using different methods for training premises it has been shown that a non-trained relation between stimuli can be stablished, so that if A > B > C > D > E, then B > D. Despite the widely reported cases of TI, the specific mechanisms underlying this phenomenon remain under discussion. In the present experiment pigeons were trained in a TI procedure with four premises. After being exposed to all premises, the pigeons showed a consistent preference for B over D during the test. After overtraining C+D- alone, B was still preferred over D. However, the expected pattern of training performance (referred to as serial position effect) was distorted, whereas TI remained unaltered. The results are discussed regarding value transfer and reinforcement contingencies as possible mechanisms. We conclude that reinforcement contingencies can affect training performance without altering TI.

Citing Articles

Memory reactivation in slow wave sleep enhances relational learning in humans.

Santamaria L, Kashif I, McGinley N, Lewis P Commun Biol. 2024; 7(1):288.

PMID: 38459227 PMC: 10923908. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-024-05947-7.

Probabilistic reinforcement precludes transitive inference: A preliminary study.

Camarena H, Garcia-Leal O, Delgadillo-Orozco J, Barron E Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1111597.

PMID: 37063537 PMC: 10097881. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1111597.

Individual differences could explain the failure in transitive inference formation in pigeons using probabilistic reinforcement.

Camarena H, Garcia-Leal O, Saldana-Hernandez Z, Barron E Front Psychol. 2023; 13:1033583.

PMID: 36733878 PMC: 9888551. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1033583.

Hierarchical development of dominance through the winner-loser effect and socio-spatial structure.

van Haeringen E, Hemelrijk C PLoS One. 2022; 17(2):e0243877.

PMID: 35108262 PMC: 8809560. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243877.

References

Daisley J, Vallortigara G, Regolin L . Logic in an asymmetrical (social) brain: Transitive inference in the young domestic chick. Soc Neurosci. 2010; 5(3):309-19. DOI: 10.1080/17470910903529795. View

Albantakis L, Deco G . The encoding of alternatives in multiple-choice decision making. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009; 106(25):10308-13. PMC: 2691385. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0901621106. View

Vasconcelos M . Transitive inference in non-human animals: an empirical and theoretical analysis. Behav Processes. 2008; 78(3):313-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2008.02.017. View

Frank M, Rudy J, OReilly R . Transitivity, flexibility, conjunctive representations, and the hippocampus. II. A computational analysis. Hippocampus. 2003; 13(3):341-54. DOI: 10.1002/hipo.10084. View

Dusek J, Eichenbaum H . The hippocampus and memory for orderly stimulus relations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997; 94(13):7109-14. PMC: 21293. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.94.13.7109. View

Lazareva O, Wasserman E . Nonverbal transitive inference: Effects of task and awareness on human performance. Behav Processes. 2009; 83(1):99-112. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2009.11.002. View

Logan G . Shapes of reaction-time distributions and shapes of learning curves: a test of the instance theory of automaticity. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1992; 18(5):883-914. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.18.5.883. View

DAmato M, Colombo M . Representation of serial order in monkeys (Cebus apella). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1988; 14(2):131-9. View

Heckers S, Zalesak M, Weiss A, Ditman T, Titone D . Hippocampal activation during transitive inference in humans. Hippocampus. 2004; 14(2):153-62. DOI: 10.1002/hipo.10189. View

10.

Barnes J, Underwood B . Fate of first-list associations in transfer theory. J Exp Psychol. 1959; 58:97-105. DOI: 10.1037/h0047507. View

11.

Siemann M, Delius J, Wright A . Transitive responding in pigeons: influences of stimulus frequency and reinforcement history. Behav Processes. 2014; 37(2-3):185-95. DOI: 10.1016/0376-6357(96)00020-4. View

12.

Zentall T, Sherburne L . Transfer of value from S+ to S- in a simultaneous discrimination. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1994; 20(2):176-83. DOI: 10.1037//0097-7403.20.2.176. View

13.

Mazur J, Hastie R . Learning as accumulation: a reexamination of the learning curve. Psychol Bull. 1978; 85(6):1256-74. View

14.

Boysen S, Berntson G, Shreyer T, Quigley K . Processing of ordinality and transitivity by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol. 1993; 107(2):208-15. DOI: 10.1037/0735-7036.107.2.208. View

15.

Grosenick L, Clement T, Fernald R . Fish can infer social rank by observation alone. Nature. 2007; 445(7126):429-32. DOI: 10.1038/nature05511. View

16.

Acuna B, Eliassen J, Donoghue J, Sanes J . Frontal and parietal lobe activation during transitive inference in humans. Cereb Cortex. 2002; 12(12):1312-21. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/12.12.1312. View

17.

Daniels C, Laude J, Zentall T . Six-term transitive inference with pigeons: successive-pair training followed by mixed-pair training. J Exp Anal Behav. 2013; 101(1):26-37. PMC: 3927727. DOI: 10.1002/jeab.65. View

18.

Lazareva O, Smirnova A, Bagozkaja M, Zorina Z, Rayevsky V, Wasserman E . Transitive responding in hooded crows requires linearly ordered stimuli. J Exp Anal Behav. 2004; 82(1):1-19. PMC: 1284988. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2004.82-1. View

19.

Lazareva O, Wasserman E . Effect of stimulus orderability and reinforcement history on transitive responding in pigeons. Behav Processes. 2006; 72(2):161-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2006.01.008. View

20.

Mikolasch S, Kotrschal K, Schloegl C . Transitive inference in jackdaws (Corvus monedula). Behav Processes. 2012; 92:113-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2012.10.017. View