Response Learning versus Place Learning

Abstract

The purpose of this study, modified from an earlier experiment by Tolman, Ritchie, and Kalish, was to test Hull's theory of response learning and Tolman's theory of place learning. 10 female albino rats were trained to run an elevated T-maze. Preliminary training consisted of 6 trials per day for 4 days, emphasizing the alternation of left and right turns on successive trials. The experiment proper commenced on the fifth day and continued until each rat had reached the criterion of 11 out of 12 successive errorless trials of turning to the right, with food serving as the reinforcement. After reaching the criterion, each rat was given a test trial which consisted of a run from a new starting point, located exactly 180° from the original starting point, to either the previously rewarded goal box now located to the animal's left or to the previously unrewarded goal box now located to the animal's right. It was found that on the test trials 8 of the rats ran to the previously rewarded place and only 2 made the previously rewarded response of turning to the right. This proportion is different from chance at the .055 level. It was concluded that in situations in which there are marked intra-maze cues and marked extra-maze cues there is some evidence that place learning is probably simpler than response learning. The evidence points consistently, however, to the interpretation that the animals learned something more than merely the place where the food was to be found.