At 1:34 PM -0500 11/14/05, Ken Steele wrote:
Mike Palij wrote:
I asked the question below on the Psychteacher list but
haven't received any responses yet so I thought I'd try
here on TiPS as well. I apologize for the duplication to
the people who are on both lists.
*****************************************
I have a question about the citation of a study by Miller &
Dicara in the Kerlinger & Lee (2000) "Foundations of Behavioral
Research" (4th Ed.) but let me provide some context:
The Miller & Dicara ref (1968, Instrumental learning in urine
formation by rats: Changes in renal blood flow, American J of
Physiology) is cited several times as well as some of its data
is used in examples in Kerlinger & Lee's text. However, I was
under the impression that this was one of the "disputed" studies
(i.e., difficult to replicate/failed to replicate) that was
included in Dworkin & Miller's review(1986; Failure to replicate
visceral learning in the acute curarized rat preparation,
Behavioral Neuroscience). Kerlinger & Lee do not cite
Dworkin & Miller and refer to the Miller & Dicara study in
positive terms (e.g., "a fascinating study"-p88, "one of the
set of remarkable studies of the learning of autonomic functioning
by Miller and his colleagues"-p516).
Hi Mike:
As far as I know, Dworkin's account is not in dispute. The Miller &
Dicara study is charitably described as not replicated.
This is a must-read article for those who missed it, a fascinating
combination of science, detective work, and office politics.
I remember Miller giving an APA presentation back in the early '70s
about his autonomic operant conditioning research.
He mentioned that the size of the effect was steadily decreasing and
attributed it to the inbreeding of the albino rats that he was using
as subjects.
After the presentation I asked him the obvious question; why hadn't
he tried the same procedures with F1 crosses of albino and hooded
rats (easy enough to obtain)?
He hemmed and hawed; never really did provide an answer.
I generally regard his research program as an example of a different
kind of operant conditioning; the shaping of his graduate students to
provide the results that he expected (not unique to him, of course).
--
The best argument against Intelligent Design is that fact that people
believe in it.
* PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Psychology Dept Minnesota State University *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 *
* http://www.mnsu.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html *
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
