Abstract
Holding & Pritchatt have recently suggested that an experiment by Sheldon, in which rats learned to choose the more frequently rewarded of two paths to the same goal, is not a critical test of Deutsch's theory of behaviour since that theory can be shown to predict that certain schedules of training will establish temporary preferences for one of the paths. The results of an experiment with mice were offered as confirming this prediction. In the present paper it is argued (1) that Holding & Pritchatt's results are not entirely satisfactory; (2) that their experiment is probably not relevant to Sheldon's experiment; (3) that Deutsch's theory cannot explain the apparent stability of conditional learning.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
