DOMINIC W. MASSARO, editor
University of California, Santa Cruz

A Challenge to the Standard Interpretations of Conditioning and Choice

The Symbolic Foundations of Conditioned Behavior
By Charles R. Gallistel and John Gibbon. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2002. 196 pp. Cloth, $49.95.

Most readers of introductory textbooks, advanced textbooks on associative learning, and even primary research on conditioning and choice would assume that there is general agreement that learning involves the formation of associ-ations that are strengthened by reinforced practice. Consider, for example, Pavlov's procedure with dogs in which a previously neutral stimulus (e.g., a metronome), followed by an unconditioned stimulus (e.g., food), led to the development of conditioned responses (e.g., salivation). The standard interpretation is that this procedure leads to the development of "associative connections" that have "strength," and various manipulations (such as partial reinforcement, nonreinforcement, magnitude of reinforcement, and delay of reinforcement) affect the strength of the associative connections that are related to the observed behavior. An alternative interpretation proposed by Gallistel and Gibbon is that Pavlov's procedure leads to the learning of time intervals, such as the interval between the onset of the metronome and the delivery of the food, and combinations of the internal representations of these intervals, are related to the observed behavior. The authors refer to this as a "new conceptual framework" (p. 156). Whether or not it is novel, it is a very different from the standard interpretation.