The discrimination of magnitude

A number of theories of conditioning are based on the assumption that generalisation gradients either side of a stimulus are symmetrical. From this assumption, the prediction follows that the rate at which a discrimination is acquired between two stimuli will be unaffected by which of them signals the reinforcer (S+). In contrast to this prediction, when S+ and a non-reinforced stimulus (S-) are different in terms of their relative position on a magnitude continuum, this symmetry does not always hold. In many cases, discriminations with a high-magnitude S+ and low-magnitude S- are acquired more readily than when S+ is low-magnitude and S- is high-magnitude. The primary aim of this thesis was therefore to offer an account for this asymmetry. Chapter 2 presents evidence for such an asymmetry with clickers differing in intensity. Chapters 3 and 4 present an asymmetry with arrays differing in the number of black squares on a white background, although it emerged that the mechanisms responsible for this effect were different than for auditory intensity. One possibility, argued in Chapter 5, is that these modalities present contrasting results due to differences in how the stimuli are represented at the receptor level. With this considered, in an attempt to account for both sets of data in terms of theories of conditioning, an adaptation to Pearce´s (1987) configural theory is proposed whereby similarity between stimuli is based on the proportion of common elements, rather than the number of common elements. It is further argued that this amendment provides a more satisfactory account of the reported results than the original theory of Pearce. In addition, the amended theory is shown to account for a wider range of results than the Rescorla-Wagner (1972) model

Asymmetry in the discrimination of quantity: the role of stimulus generalization

In order to evaluate 1 account for the asymmetry that has been found with discriminations based on stimulus magnitude, in 5 autoshaping experiments, 2 groups of pigeons received a discrimination between 5 and 20 squares presented on a TV screen. One group received a 20+/5– discrimination, with food signaled by 20 squares but not 5 squares; the other group received the opposite discrimination, 5+/20–. The 20+/5– discrimination was acquired more readily than 5+/20– in Experiments 1, 3a, 3b, and 4. For Experiment 1, the screen was white for the intertrial interval (ITI) and the stimuli were black squares on a white background; for Experiment 3a, the screen was black for the ITI and the stimuli were black squares on a white background; and for Experiments 3b and 4, the screen was white for the ITI and the stimuli were white squares on a black background. In Experiment 2, the stimuli were black squares on a white background, but they were separated by an ITI in which 288 black squares were presented against a white background. The 20+/5– discrimination was now acquired more slowly than the 5+/20– discrimination. The asymmetry in the acquisition of the magnitude discriminations in each experiment is attributed to inhibition being associated with the stimuli present during the ITI. The generalization of this inhibition, along a dimension related to the number of squares on the screen, is then assumed to disrupt the acquisition of 1 discrimination to a greater extent than the other

Asymmetry in the discrimination of quantity by rats: the role of the intertrial interval

In three experiments, rats were trained to discriminate between 20 and five (Exps. 1 and 2), or between 40 and five (Exp. 3), black squares. The squares were randomly distributed in the center of a white background and displayed on a computer screen. For one group, the patterns containing the higher quantity of squares signaled the delivery of sucrose (+), whilst patterns with the lower quantity of squares did not (–). For the second group, sucrose was signaled by the lower, but not by the higher, quantity of squares. In Experiment 1, the intertrial interval (ITI) was a white screen, and the 20+/5– discrimination was acquired more readily than the 5+/20– discrimination. For Experiment 2, the ITI was made up of 80 black squares on a white background. In this instance, the 5+/20– discrimination was acquired more successfully than the 20+/5– discrimination. In Experiment 3, two groups were trained with a 40+/5– discrimination, and two with a 5+/40– discrimination. For one group from each of these pairs, the training trials were separated by a white ITI, and the 40+/5– discrimination was acquired more readily than the 5+/40– discrimination. For the remaining two groups, the training trials were not separated by an ITI, and the two groups acquired the task at approximately the same rate. The results indicate that the cues present during the ITI play a role in the asymmetrical acquisition of magnitude discriminations based on quantity

A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

A Many-analysts Approach to the Relation Between Religiosity and Well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N = 10, 535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β = 0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β = 0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

Asymmetry in the discrimination of quantity: The role of stimulus generalization.

In order to evaluate 1 account for the asymmetry that has been found with discriminations based on stimulus magnitude, in 5 autoshaping experiments, 2 groups of pigeons received a discrimination between 5 and 20 squares presented on a TV screen. One group received a 20+/5– discrimination, with food signaled by 20 squares but not 5 squares; the other group received the opposite discrimination, 5+/20–. The 20+/5– discrimination was acquired more readily than 5+/20– in Experiments 1, 3a, 3b, and 4. For Experiment 1, the screen was white for the intertrial interval (ITI) and the stimuli were black squares on a white background; for Experiment 3a, the screen was black for the ITI and the stimuli were black squares on a white background; and for Experiments 3b and 4, the screen was white for the ITI and the stimuli were white squares on a black background. In Experiment 2, the stimuli were black squares on a white background, but they were separated by an ITI in which 288 black squares were presented against a white background. The 20+/5– discrimination was now acquired more slowly than the 5+/20– discrimination. The asymmetry in the acquisition of the magnitude discriminations in each experiment is attributed to inhibition being associated with the stimuli present during the ITI. The generalization of this inhibition, along a dimension related to the number of squares on the screen, is then assumed to disrupt the acquisition of 1 discrimination to a greater extent than the other