Search

Evidence from serial pattern learning research has been used to support the controversial claim that rats detect, encode, and use abstract rules. To understand why the evidence indicates that rats’ “rules”are abstract, we examine the basis of “pattern structure” in sequential tasks, how rats respond to pattern structure in highly-organized sequences, the role of “rules” in rats’ representation of patterned sequences, and the notion that rats’ “rules” differ from generalization. We show that “pattern structure” reflects systematic abstractions from stimuli that can be described by abstract relationships,that rats are flexible in representing sequential patterns, that rats use “rules” along with other forms of representation concurrently in serial pattern learning, and that associative/generalization models do not always predict rats’ “rule-governed” behavior. Both behavioral and neurobiological evidence suggest that “rules” are not simply emergent properties of associative networks, that instead rule abstraction and associative processes are mediated by separate concurrently active systems in serial pattern learning. It is not known how “rules” are instantiated in the nervous system, and a key problem at a more molar level of analysis is what determines the output of multiple concurrently active cognitive systems in serial pattern learning.

Rats, like humans, appear sensitive to the structure of the elements of sequences. In the present study, we examined the effects of phrasing a structurally ambiguous pattern as either a series of “runs” or “trills.” A pattern phrased as runs was easier to learn than when it was phrased as trills, a result that resembles a similar “runs bias” reported in the human sequential learning literature. Whereas rats learning the runs-phrased pattern showed rapid learning and little tendency to make trills errors, rats learning the trills-phrased version of the pattern produced inflated rates of both trills and runs errors. The results show that rats represented the runs- and trills-phrased versions of the pattern differently. These results add to the evidence that, in addition to serving as discriminative cues, phrasing cues can bias pattern perception in rat serial pattern learning resulting in memorial representations characterized by multiple interpretations of the same pattern. The results also fit well with recent behavioral and neurobehavioral studies implicating multiple concurrent psychological and neural processes in rat serial pattern learning.

Evidence from serial pattern learning research has been used to support the controversial claim that rats detect, encode, and use abstract rules. To understand why the evidence indicates that rats' "rules" are abstract, we examine the basis of "pattern structure" in sequential tasks, how rats respond to pattern structure in highly-organized sequences, the role of "rules" in rats' representation of patterned sequences, and the notion that rats' "rules" differ from generalization. We show that "pattern structure" reflects systematic abstractions from stimuli that can be described by abstract relationships, that rats are flexible in representing sequential patterns, that rats use "rules" along with other forms of representation concurrently in serial pattern learning, and that associative/generalization models do not always predict rats' "rule-governed" behavior. Both behavioral and neurobiological evidence suggest that "rules" are not simply emergent properties of associative networks, that instead rule abstraction and associative processes are mediated by separate concurrently active systems in serial pattern learning. It is not known how "rules" are instantiated in the nervous system, and a key problem at a more molar level of analysis is what determines the output of multiple concurrently active cognitive systems in serial pattern learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rats, like humans, appear sensitive to the structure of the elements of sequences. In the present study, we examined the effects of phrasing a structurally ambiguous pattern as either a series of "runs" or "trills." A pattern phrased as runs was easier to learn than when it was phrased as trills, a result that resembles a similar "runs bias" reported in the human sequential learning literature. Whereas rats learning the runs-phrased pattern showed rapid learning and little tendency to make trills errors, rats learning the trills-phrased version of the pattern produced inflated rates of both trills and runs errors. The results show that rats represented the runs- and trills-phrased versions of the pattern differently. These results add to the evidence that, in addition to serving as discriminative cues, phrasing cues can bias pattern perception in rat serial pattern learning resulting in memorial representations characterized by multiple interpretations of the same pattern. The results also fit well with recent behavioral and neurobehavioral studies implicating multiple concurrent psychological and neural processes in rat serial pattern learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]