Errorless discrimination established by differential autoshaping

In Experiment I, pigeons exposed to a differential autoshaping procedure pecked a key in the presence of the stimulus associated with reinforcement but did not peck, or pecked infrequently, in the presence of the stimulus associated with nonreinforcement. In Experiment II, pigeons were exposed to a differential autoshaping procedure in which one stimulus was associated with reinforcement and two stimuli were associated with nonreinforcement. The birds initially responded in the presence of one stimulus associated with nonreinforcement but never responded in the presence of the second stimulus associated with nonreinforcement. They were subsequently exposed to an autoshaping procedure in which reinforcement followed both these stimuli. The number of stimulus-reinforcement pairings required to establish pecking in the presence of the stimulus during which responses had not previously occurred suggested that such stimuli are inhibitory. These findings have implications for autoshaping, errorless discrimination, inhibition, and theories of discrimination byproducts.     

A test of the reinforcing properties of stimuli correlated with nonreinforcement

The information hypothesis of conditioned reinforcement predicts that a stimulus that “reduces uncertainty” about the outcome of a trial will acquire reinforcing properties, even when the stimulus reliably predicts nonreinforcement. Four pigeons' key pecks produced one of two 5-sec stimuli with 0.50 probability according to a discriminated variable-interval schedule. One stimulus was followed by reinforcement; a second stimulus was followed by blackout. To the same extent, therefore, both stimuli reduced uncertainty about the possibility that food would arrive at the termination of the schedule interval. When a second key in the chamber was lighted, each peck on it could produce the stimulus preceding reinforcement, the stimulus preceding nonreinforcement, a novel stimulus, or no stimulus, across separate conditions. The stimulus preceding food maintained responding at substantial levels on the second, stimulus-producing, key. Such responding was not maintained by other stimuli. These data, replicated when the stimuli were reversed on the variable-interval schedule, do not support the prediction that uncertainty-reducing stimuli are necessarily conditioned reinforcers.     

Stimulus-specific contrast effects during operant discrimination learning

In two experiments, pigeons' responding was equally reinforced in the presence of four line-orientation stimuli. Responding was then reinforced when only two of the four orientation stimuli were present; the remaining two orientations appeared during extinction. Response rates were often highest in the stimulus adjacent to the orientations presented during extinction and often lowest in that orientation adjacent to the orientations presented with reinforcement. These effects were stronger and more persistent when the stimuli were separated by a smaller angle, rendering the discrimination more difficult. These and other data suggest that discrimination training may not be accurately explained in terms of the simple effects of reinforcement and nonreinforcement associated with isolated stimuli, nor by accounts that depend upon stimulus generalization. Recent accounts of contrast that depend upon “emotionality” produced by nonreinforced responding or upon reinforcement-elicited responses are also difficult to apply to these data.     

General attentiveness effects of discriminative training

Using a design that permitted the simultaneous assessment of intra-, inter-, and extradimensional effects of discriminative training, the generality of discriminative effects that have been said to reflect increases in “general attentiveness” was assessed. Pigeons received either discriminative training with two stimuli correlated with reinforcement and one stimulus correlated with nonreinforcement, or nondifferential reinforcement (control) training. One positive stimulus was part of an intradimensional task and the other was not. After training, generalization tests were conducted to assess stimulus control along several dimensions. Discriminative training resulted in increased control along dimensions of the positive stimulus involved in the intradimensional task, but not along any dimensions of the other positive stimulus. The results suggested that discriminative training leads to increases in attention that are neither so general as suggested by the “general attentiveness” view nor so specific as to be revealed solely by intradimensional effects.     

Schedules using noxious stimuli. II: low intensity electric shock as a discriminative stimulus

The presence or absence of pulses of low intensity electric shock was used as a discriminative stimulus to control responding under fixed ratio reinforcement in the squirrel monkey. Initially brief periods of nonreinforcement were lengthened only when discriminative control was evident. Discriminative control was studied by (1) varying the duration of nonreinforcement periods; (2) reversing the stimulus conditions correlated with reinforcement and nonreinforcement periods; and (3) determining the minimum shock intensity necessary to maintain discriminative control. Stimulus control was not reliably affected by d-amphetamine, chlorpromazine, or morphine. The discriminative control by pulses of low intensity electric shock was similar to that by other discriminative stimuli, except that the control developed slowly and was better when the pulsing shock was correlated with reinforcement than when correlated with nonreinforcement.     

Observing responses maintained by conditional discriminative stimuli.

In a conditional discrimination procedure, pigeons' observing responses were analyzed to examine whether two color stimuli (blue or red), conditionally related to whether each of two line stimuli (vertical or horizontal) accompanied reinforcement or nonreinforcement, functioned as conditioned reinforcers. If a variable-interval (VI) 10-s requirement was fulfilled, an observing response produced onset of a color stimulus. A little later, a line stimulus was presented independently of responding, added to the color stimulus to form a compound stimulus. If 55 s elapsed with a response not having occurred either through 55 s or after the variable-interval 10-s had timed out, one of the color-line compound stimuli was presented independently of responding. To control for sensory reinforcement effects and for earlier entrance to the later link, a simple discrimination procedure also was conducted in which reinforcement was not correlated with the color stimuli but with the line stimuli only. As in the conditional discrimination, the observing response also could produce earlier presentation of blue or red. The observing response occurred more frequently during the conditional discrimination than during the simple discrimination. The results were related to different theoretical accounts of conditioned reinforcement, particularly the information hypothesis.     

Establishing Functional Classes In A Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) With A Two-item Sequential-Responding Procedure

A 9-year-old female chimpanzee was trained on a two-item sequential-responding task. Attempts were made with successive-reversal training to establish functional classes. In Experiment 1, the subject was exposed to between-session successive-reversal training in which one of two pairs of stimuli was reversed, and transfer of reversal responding to the other pair was tested with nonreinforcement probe trials. She did not show transfer during the course of reversals. Stimulus control established in the original training was maintained on nonreinforcement probe trials. In Experiment 2, within-session reversals were introduced. She showed transfer from the initially reversed pair to the other. The results were consistent with Vaughan's (1988) results with pigeons on successive discriminations, which indicated the formation of functional classes. In Experiment 3, crossover and wild-card tests were conducted to clarify the stimulus control of sequential responding. The results suggested that the sequential responding was controlled only by the first stimulus of each pair. To establish control by both first and second stimuli, trial-unique stimuli or wild cards were substituted for one of the items of the lists in Experiment 4. Further transfer tests, in which stimuli for the two new pairs appeared, were also given to the subject. She successfully responded to these two merged lists and reversed the order as the result of reversal training.     

Conditional discrimination with ambiguous stimuli.

Five pigeons learned a two-key conditional discrimination. When background color on both keys was red, pecks on the key with a horizontal line produced food. When the color was green, pecks on the key with a vertical line produced food. During part of the experiment, color was presented on only one of the keys. It was found that accuracy was higher when color was combined with the line stimulus correlated with nonreinforcement. In another part of the experiment, color was presented on both keys but a line was present only on one. Accuracy was higher when the line accompanied the nonreinforced option than when the line accompanied the reinforced option. Superior performance when the combined stimuli were displayed on the nonfood key may be explained by the association of different components of the compound stimuli with reinforcement or as the result of rules pigeons follow in solving conditional discriminations.     

Discrimination and generalization by rats of temporal stimuli lasting for minutes

In three experiments, rats learned to respond differentially to reinforced and nonreinforced trials when the length of the intertrial interval (ITI) predicted the trial outcome (reinforcement or nonreinforcement). Rats in control groups, for whom the length of the ITI did not predict the outcome, did not show differential performance on nonreinforced and reinforced trials. Generalization gradients obtained following discrimination training were comparable to those obtained following discrimination training with other types of discriminative stimuli. That is, groups which had shown differential performance in discrimination training yielded generalization gradients with fastest speeds at the previously reinforced ITIs, slowest speeds at the previously nonreinforced ITIs, and intermediate speeds at ITIs of intermediate length. Control groups yielded flat gradients across all ITIs tested. These effects were shown for relative time discrimination (short time = reinforcement, long time = nonreinforcement, or the reverse) and also for an absolute time discrimination (long and short time = reinforcement, middle time = nonreinforcement or the reverse). This method was effective for time duration measured in minutes rather than seconds, as is more commonly the case.     

Stimulus function in simultaneous discrimination

In discrimination learning, the negativity of the stimulus correlated with nonreinforcement (S-) declines after 100 training trials while the stimulus correlated with reinforcement (S+) is paradoxically more positive with lesser amounts of discrimination training. Training subjects on two simultaneous discrimination tasks revealed a within-subjects overlearning reversal effect, where a more-frequently presented discrimination problem was better learned in reversal than was a discrimination problem presented less frequently during training.     

The role of information in the emission of observing responses: a test of two hypotheses

Pigeons were trained on a trial procedure in a Skinner box. Each trial began with a fixed-interval schedule. Responding on this schedule produced a stimulus and a delayed trial outcome. The stimulus signalled whether the forthcoming outcome was reinforcement or nonreinforcement. Thus, the response was an observing response. When reinforcement was the outcome on 20% of the trials, response rates in the fixed interval were higher than when reinforcement was the outcome on 80% of the trials. This result is consistent with the hypothesis that observing responses are reinforced by the information associated with the stimulus signalling reinforcement. The result seems inconsistent with the hypothesis that observing responses are also reinforced by the information associated with the stimulus signalling nonreinforcement.     

ASSOCIATIVE SYMMETRY,ANTISYMMETRY, AND A THEORY OF PIGEONS' EQUIVALENCE‐CLASS FORMATION

Five experiments assessed associative symmetry in pigeons. In Experiments 1A, 1B and 2, pigeons learned two‐alternative symbolic matching with identical sample‐ and comparison‐response requirements and with matching stimuli appearing in all possible locations. Despite controlling for the nature of the functional stimuli and insuring all requisite discriminations, there was little or no evidence for symmetry. By contrast, Experiment 3 demonstrated symmetry in successive (go/no‐go) matching, replicating the findings of Frank and Wasserman (2005). In view of these results, I propose that in successive matching, (1) the functional stimuli are stimulus‐temporal location compounds, (2) continual nonreinforcement of some sample‐comparison combinations juxtaposed with reinforcement of other combinations throughout training facilitates stimulus class formation, (3) classes consist of the elements of the reinforced combinations, and (4) common elements produce class merger. The theory predicts that particular sets of training relations should yield “antisymmetry”: Pigeons should respond more to a reversal of the nonreinforced symbolic baseline relations than to a reversal of the reinforced relations. Experiment 4 confirmed this counterintuitive prediction. These results and other theoretical implications support the idea that equivalence relations are a natural consequence of reinforcement contingencies.     

An analysis of reinforcement history effects

Four pigeons were exposed to two tandem variable-interval differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedules under different stimulus conditions. The values of the tandem schedules were adjusted so that reinforcement rates in one stimulus condition were higher than those in the other, even though response rates in the two conditions were nearly identical. Following this, a fixed-interval schedule of either shorter or longer values than, or equal to the baseline schedule, was introduced in the two stimulus conditions respectively. Response rates during those fixed-interval schedules typically were higher in the presence of the stimuli previously correlated with the lower reinforcement rates than were those in the presence of the stimuli previously correlated with the higher reinforcement rates. Such effects of the reinforcement history were most prominent when the value of the fixed-interval schedule was shorter. The results are consistent with both incentive contrast and response strength conceptualizations of related effects. They also suggest methods for disentangling the effects of reinforcement rate on subsequent responding, from the response rate with which it is confounded in many conventional schedules of reinforcement.     

Successive matching-to-sample in the pigeon: Variations on a theme by Konorski

In 1959, Konorski proposed a successive matching-to-sample paradigm with which to study short-term memory in animals. Although the technique has been little used, it affords several distinct advantages over more commonly employed matching-to-sample procedures. Konorski’s paradigm involves the successive presentation of a pair of discriminative stimuli with a brief interstimulus interval between them. Reinforcement is scheduled to occur only when the second stimulus of a pair matches the first; otherwise, nonreinforcement follows. An investigation of the pigeon’s food-reinforced keypecking behavior is reported using a variant of Konorski’s technique. Pigeons rapidly learned to differentiate matching and nonmatching stimulus pairs when brief (5-sec) color stimuli were separated by a 1-sec interstimulus interval. No such differentiation arose when control subjects were trained with reinforcement equiprobable on matching and nonmatching trials. No support was found for the notion that correct performance under this successive-matching procedure was due to overt mediating behaviors.     

The allocation of time to temporally defined behaviors: responding during stimulus generalization.

In one stimulus condition, reinforcement depended on rats holding a lever for a duration having both minimum and maximum boundaries. During a second light intensity, reinforcement was not available for some rats; for others, reinforcement depended on a second response duration requirement. Generalization test stimuli controlled the same response durations found during training, and the amount of time allocated to a given response duration depended on the proximity of the test stimulus to the training stimulus which controlled that particular duration. The results indicated that a gradient of stimulus control does not reflect an underlying continuous change in responding, but is a result of the mixing of responses previously controlled by stimuli present during conditioning.     

Transitive responding in hooded crows requires linearly ordered stimuli

Eight crows were taught to discriminate overlapping pairs of visual stimuli (A+ B-, B+ C-, C+ D-, and D+ E-). For 4 birds, the stimuli were colored cards with a circle of the same color on the reverse side whose diameter decreased from A to E (ordered feedback group). These circles were made available for comparison to potentially help the crows order the stimuli along a physical dimension. For the other 4 birds, the circles corresponding to the colored cards had the same diameter (constant feedback group). In later testing, a novel choice pair (BD) was presented. Reinforcement history involving stimuli B and D was controlled so that the reinforcement/nonreinforcement ratios for the latter would be greater than for the former. If, during the BD test, the crows chose between stimuli according to these reinforcement/nonreinforcement ratios, then they should prefer D; if they chose according to the diameter of the feedback stimuli, then they should prefer B. In the ordered feedback group, the crows strongly preferred B over D; in the constant feedback group, the crows' choice did not differ significantly from chance. These results, plus simulations using associative models, suggest that the orderability of the postchoice feedback stimuli is important for crows' transitive responding.     

Reinforcement of human observing behavior by a stimulue correlated with extinction or increased effort

Young men pulled a plunger on mixed and multiple schedules in which periods of variable-interval monetary reinforcement alternated irregularly with periods of extinction (Experiment 1), or in which reinforcement was contingent on different degrees of effort in the two alternating components (Experiment 2). In the baseline conditions, the pair of stimuli correlated with the schedule components could be obtained intermittently by pressing either of two observing keys. In the main conditions, pressing one of the keys continued to produce both discriminative stimuli as appropriate. Pressing the other key produced only the stimulus correlated with variable-interval reinforcement or reduced effort; presses on this key were ineffective during periods of extinction or increased effort. In both experiments, key presses producing both stimuli occurred at higher rates than key presses producing only one, demonstrating enhancement of observing behavior by a stimulus correlated with the less favorable of two contingencies. A control experiment showed that stimulus change alone was not an important factor in the maintenance of the behavior. These findings suggest that negative as well as positive stimuli may play a role in the conditioned reinforcement of human behavior.     

Stimulus change as a factor in response maintenance with free food available.

Rats bar pressed for food on a reinforcement schedule in which every response was reinforced, even though a dish of pellets was present. Initially, auditory and visual stimuli accompanied response-produced food presentation. With stimulus feedback as an added consequence of bar pressing, responding was maintained in the presence of free food; without stimulus feedback, responding decreased to a low level. Auditory feedback maintained slightly more responding than did visual feedback, and both together maintained more responding than did either separately. Almost no responding occurred when the only consequence of bar pressing was stimulus feedback. The data indicated conditioned and sensory reinforcement effects of response-produced stimulus feedback.     

Relative versus absolute reinforcement effects: implications for preference assessments

We compared results obtained in two previous studies on reinforcer identification (Fisher et al., 1992; Pace, Ivancic, Edwards, Iwata, & Page, 1985) by combining methodologies from both studies. Eight individuals with mental retardation participated. During Phase 1, two preference assessments were conducted, one in which stimuli were presented singly (SS method) and one in which stimuli were presented in pairs (PS method). Based on these results, two types of stimuli were identified for each participant: High-preference (HP) stimuli were those selected on 75% or more trials during both preference assessments; low-preference (LP) stimuli were those selected on 100% of the SS trials but on 25% or fewer of the PS trials. During Phase 2, the reinforcing effects of HP and LP stimuli were evaluated in reversal designs under two test conditions: concurrent and single schedules of continuous reinforcement. Two response options were available under the concurrent-schedule condition: One response produced access to the HP stimulus; the other produced access to the LP stimulus. Only one response option was available under the single-schedule condition, and that response produced access only to the LP stimulus. Results indicated that 7 of the 8 participants consistently showed preference for the HP stimulus under the concurrent schedule. However, when only the LP stimulus was available during the single-schedule condition, response rates for 6 of the 7 participants were as high as those observed for the HP stimulus during the concurrent-schedule condition (1 participant showed no reinforcement effect). These results indicate that, although the concurrent-schedule procedure is well suited to the assessment of relative reinforcement effects (preference for one reinforcer over another), absolute reinforcement effects associated with a given stimulus may be best examined under single-schedule conditions.     

Transfer of the partial reinforcement extinction effect between escape (shock) and appetitive (food) conditioning

In the first experiment rats were given partial reinforcement or continuous reinforcement in either an escape or an appetitive paradigm. Subsequently, the rats received continuous reinforcement training under motivational conditions opposite those experienced earlier. Finally, responses were extinguished according to the motivational conditions experienced in the second phase. The results indicated that partial reinforcement in the initial phase operated to increase resistance to extinction in the last. In a second experiment this intermotivational partial reinforcement extinction effect was shown to survive interpolated experiences with extinction, a 1-week rest period, and continuous reinforcement reacquisition. A third experiment examined the influence of intramodal versus intermodal nonreinforcement-reinforcement sequences on the intermotivational partial reinforcement extinction effect. Interactive effects between similarity of aversive outcome (escape nonreinforcement, appetitive nonreinforcement) and reinforcement type (negative, positive) were found. The theoretical implications of the data from all three experiments are discussed.