López-Romero LJ, García BR, Morán RE, Alvarado GA

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 1053-1069
PDF size: 782.71 Kb.

ABSTRACT

On recent years, regarding the subject of spatial learning, there had been several researches in which certain empiric ideas had been put to test. Such ideas range from the functional equivalence between perception and imagination (Shepard y Metzer, 1971), the cognitive mapping applied to spatial learning (O’Keefe y Nadel, 1978), and the well-known association between spatial signals (Chamizo, 2002). The classic phenomena of blocking had been tested and observed in spatial learning, therefore explained based on associative theories. On the current research, in order to gather evidence to support associative theories applied to spatial learning, based on the blocking and unblocking effect, a task was designed in which three-dimensional and two-dimensional signals were rotated. Voluntary participation from CICS IPN College students were intended and obtained, to whom it was asked to solve a conditional discrimination task in which they had to mentally rotate the sample stimuli and compare them to three possible answers in order to choose the best possible one, and receiving a reward. In the BLO group was observed less correct answers than in the control group, consequently interpreted as a blocking effect, meanwhile in the DESBLO group was observed the same amount of right answers than in the control group, which suggested an unblocking effect. Results of this research support the theory that tasks regarding rotating two-dimensional and three-dimensional imagines can be explained based on simple associative mechanisms.

REFERENCES

1. Alvarado, A., Vila, J. Strempler-Rubio, E. y López-Romero, L. (2011). Aprendizaje espacial y recuperación espontánea en humanos. Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta. 37 (2), 139-153. DOI: 10.5514/rmac.v37.i2.26144

2. Chamizo, V. D. (2002) Spatial learning: Condition and basic effects. Psicológica, 23, 33-57.

3. Devenport, L. D. y Devenport, J. A. (1994). Time-dependent averaging of foraging information in least chipmunks and golden-mantled ground squirrels. Animal Behavior, 47, 787-802.

4. Hamilton, D. A., y Sutherland, R. J. (1999). Blocking in human place learning: Evidence from virtual navigation. Psychobiology, 27(4), 453-461.

5. Le Pelley, M. E., Oakeshott, S. M., y McLaren, I. P. L. (2005). Blocking and unblocking in human causal learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 31(1), 56-70.

6. Morris, R. G. M. (1981). Spatial localization does not require the presence of local cues. Learning and Motivation, 12, 239–260.

7. O´Keefe, J., y Nadel, L. (1978). The hippocampus as a cognitive map. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Recuperado de: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hipo.450010303.

8. Rescorla, R. A. y Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of pavlovian conditioning : variations on the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In Black, A. H. y Prokasy, W. F. (Eds.), Classical Conditioning II : Current Theory and Research. Appleton-Century Crofts. New York. Sharkey y

9. Sharkey, 1995.Rosas, J.M., Callejas, J. E., Ramos, M. y Fernández, M,. (2006) Revision of retrieval theory of forgetting. What does make information Contex-specific. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 6 (2) 147-166

10. Rodrigo, T., Arral, M. y Chamizo. V.D (2005). Blocking and unblocking in a navigation task. Psicológica, 26(2), 229-241.

11. Shepard, R. N. y Metzler, J. (1971) Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171 (3972), 701-703.

12. Tolman, E.C., Ritchie, B. F. y Kalish, D. (1946a) Studies in spatial learning. I. Orientation and the short-cut. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 13- 24.

13. Tolman, E.C., Ritchie, B. F. y Kalish, D. (1946b) Studies in spatial learning. II. Place learning versus response learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 221-229.