Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 256

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Cues: Their Relative Effectiveness as a Function of the Reinforcer

Garcia, J., McGowan, B. K., Ervin, F. R., Koelling, R. A.·1968·Science

Abstract

Two cues, either size or flavor of food pellet, were conditionally paired with either malaise induced by x-ray or pain induced by shock in four groups of rats. The combination of flavor and illness produced as conditioned decrement in consumption, but that of size and illness did not. Conversely, the combination of size and pain produced an inhibition of eating, but flavor and pain did not. Apparently, effective associative learning depends on central neural convergence of the paired afferent input.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.160.3829.794

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 256

Metadata

Authors
Garcia, J., McGowan, B. K., Ervin, F. R., & Koelling, R. A.
Venue
Science
Published
1968-05-17
Volume
160
Issue
3829
Pages
794-795
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W1988211152
Cited by
256
References
0
FWCI
5.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cues: Their Relative Effectiveness as a Function of the Reinforcer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1126/science.160.3829.794
The paper
Garcia, J., McGowan, B. K., Ervin, F. R., & Koelling, R. A. (1968). Cues: Their Relative Effectiveness as a Function of the Reinforcer. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.160.3829.794

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.