MATCHING‐TO‐SAMPLE PERFORMANCE IN RATS: A CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY?

Abstract

Three rats had previously acquired a simultaneous matching‐to‐sample performance with steady and blinking lights. In training, the sample stimulus had always appeared on the middle of three horizontally arranged keys with the comparison stimuli on the side keys. In Experiment 1, the sample stimulus appeared on any of the three keys with the comparison stimuli on the remaining two. The matching‐to‐sample performance broke down with variable sample and comparison locations; the sample stimulus did not control responding to the comparison stimuli when it appeared on a side key, but it retained control when it appeared on the middle key (as in training). In Experiment 2, the rats were trained with the sample always on the left key. When the sample appeared on either of the trained locations (left or middle key), it retained control for both locations. When the sample then appeared on any of the three keys, as in Experiment 1, sample control did not transfer to the untrained location (right key). The experiments demonstrate that training with fixed sample and comparison locations may establish spatial location as an additional controlling aspect of the stimuli displayed on the keys; stimulus location had become part of the definition of the controlling stimuli. The rats' performance seemed best described as specific discriminations involving the visual stimuli and their spatial locations rather than as identity matching.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 92 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.