Positive behavioral contrast,autoshaping, and omission responding in the goldfish (Carassius auratus)

Two experiments with goldfish were performed to investigate the role of stimulus-reinforcer vs. response-reinforcer relationships in omission training and the role of stimulus localizability in a positive behavioral contrast paradigm. The directed behavior of fish, like that of pigeons and rats in other studies, was greatly influenced by positive stimulus-reinforcer correlations, as evidenced by maintained contacts of a signal for food, even though such responses terminated the signal and cancelled reinforcement delivery. Goldfish exhibited positive behavioral contrast when the signals for reinforcement and nonreinforcement were displayed directly on the response key, but no contrast was observed when variations in a diffuse houselight stimulus were used as signals for reinforcement or nonreinforcement. Analysis of sequential-trial data yielded effects analogous to Pavlovian positive and negative induction. Theoretical and methodological problems were briefly considered.     

ANALYSIS OF FOURTH GRADE TESTING

Three hundred and ninety‐nine Grade 4 Brisbane children were given a battery o1 general ability and achievement tests. Means and standard deviations allowed construction of 15‐point scales for a Queensland Grade 4. A correlation matrix included indices concerning sub‐tests of general ability and achievement tests. Comparisons with original A.C.E.R. co‐efficients were made. The matrix was factor sub‐tests of general ability and achievement tests. Comparisons with analysed and rotated, three factors emerging ‐‐ verbal, performance and computational. A canonical correlation was performed and three significant elements emerged ‐‐ a verbal, a computational (or integrative or automatic sequential) and a problem‐solving element.