Spatial discrimination reversal learning was explored for mice genetically selected for high brain weight and unselected controls with lower brain weights. Control-line Ss escaped from a water maze more rapidly, but high-line Ss made fewer errors and took less trials to reach criterion on the first reversal. Control-line Ss were unable to complete more than 1 reversal, while high-line Ss all completed at least 7 reversals. This positive relation between reversal learning and brain size is consistent with comparisons among species and experiments manipulating brain size by means of drugs or surgery.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BittermanM. E.Phyletic differences in learning. American Psychologist, 1965, 20, 396–409.
2.
EliasM. F.Differences in spatial discrimination reversal learning for mice genetically selected for high brain weight and unselected controls. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1969, 28, 707–712.
3.
FeldmanJ.Successive reversal performance as a function of level of motivation and incentive. Paper presented to the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association, Denver, Colorado, 1968.
4.
FullerJ. L., & WimerR. E.Neural, sensory, and motor functions. In GreenE. L. (Ed.), Biology of the laboratory mouse. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966. Pp. 609–628.
5.
GonzalesR. C.RobertsW. A., & BittermanM. E.Learning in adult rats with extensive cortical lesions made in infancy. American Journal of Psychology, 1964, 77, 547–562.
6.
GossetteR. L.Role of motivational and incentive levels in the control of successive discrimination reversal (SDR) performance in comparative analysis. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1969, 28, 283–292.
7.
GossetteR. L., & GossetteM. F.Examination of the reversal index (RI) across fifteen different mammalian species. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1967, 24, 987–990.
8.
HaddadR. K.RabeA.LaqueurG. L.SpatzM., & ValsamisM. P.Intellectual deficit associated with transplacentally induced microcephaly in the rat. Science, 1968, 163, 88–90.
9.
KimbleD. P., & KimbleR. J.Hippocampectomy and response perserveration in the rat. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1965, 60, 474–476.
SiegelS.Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
12.
TallandG. A.Deranged memory. New York: Academic Press, 1965.
13.
WallerM. P.WallerP. F., & BrewsterL. A.A water maze for use in studies of drive and learning. Psychological Reports, 1960, 7, 99–102.
14.
WarrenJ. M.Comparative psychology of learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 1965, 16, 95–118.
15.
WimerC., & PraterL.Some behavioral differences in mice genetically selected for high and low brain weight. Psychological Reports, 1966, 19, 675–681.
16.
WimerR. E.SymingtonL.FarmerH., & SchwartzkroinP.Differences in memory processes between inbred mouse strains C57BL/6J and DBA/2J. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1968, 65, 126–131.
