Associative symmetry by pigeons after few-exemplar training

The present experiment investigated whether pigeons can show associative symmetry on a two-alternative matching-to-sample procedure. The procedure consisted of a within-subject sequence of training and testing with reinforcement, and it provided (a) exemplars of symmetrical responding, and (b) all prerequisite discriminations among test samples and comparisons. After pigeons had learned two arbitrary-matching tasks (A-B and C-D), they were given a reinforced symmetry test for half of the baseline relations (B1-A1 and D1-C1). To control for the effects of reinforcement during testing, two novel, nonsymmetrical responses were concurrently reinforced using the other baseline stimuli (D2-A2 and B2-C2). Pigeons matched at chance on both types of relations, thus indicating no evidence for symmetry. These symmetrical and nonsymmetrical relations were then directly trained in order to provide exemplars of symmetry and all prerequisite discriminations for a second test. The symmetrical test relations were now B2-A2 and D2-C2 and the nonsymmetrical relations were D1-A1 and B1-C1. On this test, 1 pigeon showed clear evidence of symmetry, 2 pigeons showed weak evidence, and 1 pigeon showed no evidence. The previous training of all prerequisite discriminations among stimuli, and the within-subject control for testing with reinforcement seem to have set favorable conditions for the emergence of symmetry in nonhumans. However, the variability across subjects shows that methodological variables still remain to be controlled.     

The emergence of symmetry in a conditional discrimination task using different responses as propioceptive samples in pigeons

In Experiment 1, 10 pigeons were exposed to a successive symbolic matching-to-sample procedure in which the sample was generated by the pigeons' own behavior. Each trial began with both response keys illuminated white, one being the "correct" key and the other the "incorrect" key. The pigeons had no way of discriminating which key was correct and which incorrect, since these roles were assigned on a random basis with the same probability of 0.5 for each key. A fixed ratio of five responses was required on the correct key. However, each time the pigeon pecked the incorrect key, the correct key response counter reset. Five consecutive pecks on the correct key was the only way to end this component, and switch off both key lights. Two seconds later, these same keys were illuminated again, one green and the other red (comparison stimuli). Now, if the correct white key had been on the left, a peck at one color produced food, and if the correct white key had been on the right, a peck at the other color produced food. When the pigeons had learned this discrimination, they were exposed to several symmetry tests (simultaneous presentations of both keys illuminated the same color-i.e., both red or both green), in order to interchange the sample with the comparison stimuli. In Experiment 2, the importance of requiring discrimination between the samples and between the comparisons was analyzed. In Experiment 3, we compared the results of Experiment 1 with a slightly different experiment, which resulted in discrimination of key position, an exteroceptive stimulus. The results showed that symmetry emerged only when different responses were used as samples.     

Formation of transitivity in conditional matching to sample by pigeons

Four homing pigeons were trained over 5 months in a zero-delay, “arbitrary” matching-to-sample procedure with sample and comparison stimuli presented on any of three response keys. Birds were also required to complete a fixed-ratio 10 requirement on both sample and comparison stimuli to terminate their presentation. The procedure resulted in the establishment of relations that were not specifically trained and that can be characterized by the property of transitivity in a stimulus equivalence context. This result was in contrast with the findings obtained from most previous research with nonhuman subjects.     

Associative symmetry in the pigeon after successive matching-to-sample training

If an organism is explicitly taught an A→B association, then might it also spontaneously learn the symmetrical B→A association? Little evidence attests to such “associative symmetry” in nonhuman animals. We report for the first time a clear case of associative symmetry in the pigeon. Experiment 1 used a successive go/no go matching‐to‐sample procedure, which showed all of the training and testing stimuli in one location and intermixed arbitrary and identity matching trials. We found symmetrical responding that was as robust during testing (B→A) as during training (A→B). In Experiment 2, we trained different pigeons using only arbitrary matching trials before symmetry testing. No symmetrical responding was found. In Experiment 3, we trained other pigeons with only arbitrary matching trials and then tested for symmetry. When these pigeons, too, did not exhibit symmetrical responding, we retrained them with intermixed identity and arbitrary matching trials. Less robust symmetrical responding was obtained here than in Experiment 1. Collectively, these results suggest that identity matching may have to be learned concurrently with arbitrary matching from the outset of training for symmetry to emerge.     

Stimulus stringing by pigeons

Pigeons were trained to peck one, two, three, and then four colors in a predetermined sequence from a five-key array where, over trials, each color appeared equally often in each position of the array. Incorrect pecks resulted in a buzzer and trial termination, with the same array presented for the next trial. Correct pecks produced feedback and correct strings could produce food. All subjects performed at a high level of accuracy with no difference at asymptote between a continuous and a mixed spectral sequence as the required order. Transfer to a new set of arrays had little effect on accuracy. Errors forward in the sequence had the highest probability, followed by repeat errors, backward errors, and dark-key errors. Some arrays had a higher level of accuracy than others but a corresponding systematic variable could not be identified.     

Reflexivity in pigeons

A recent theory of pigeons' equivalence-class formation (Urcuioli, 2008) predicts that reflexivity, an untrained ability to match a stimulus to itself, should be observed after training on two "mirror-image" symbolic successive matching tasks plus identity successive matching using some of the symbolic matching stimuli. One group of pigeons was trained in this fashion; a second group was trained similarly but with successive oddity (rather than identity). Subsequently, comparison-response rates on novel matching versus mismatching sequences with the remaining symbolic matching stimuli were measured on nonreinforced probe trials. Higher rates were observed on matching than on mismatching probes in the former group. The opposite effect--higher rates on mismatching than matching probes--was mostly absent in the latter group, despite being predicted by the theory. Nevertheless, the ostensible reflexivity effect observed in former group may be the first time this phenomenon has been demonstrated in any animal.     

A test of symmetry and transitivity in the conditional discrimination performances of pigeons

In a matching-to-sample context, pigeons were taught two conditional discriminations according to one of three equivalence paradigms: train if A, then select B and if B, then select C; train if B, then A and if B, then C; or train if A, then B and if C, then B. Test trials without reinforcement revealed that the conditional relations did not satisfy the symmetrical and transitive properties of an equivalence relation. Apparently, only specific if... then relations were learned. Contrary to Kendall's (1983) findings, and probably as a consequence of procedural differences, none of the pigeons in the present experiment were observed to emit mediating behavior during the transitivity probe trials. The absence of symmetry and transitivity may be related to the individual stimuli not being reflexive. Behavioral techniques other than the commonly used matching-to-sample technique might better succeed in avoiding unintended stimulus control in the study of the formation of stimulus classes.     

Transfer of pigeons' matching to sample to novel sample locations

This study examined the conditions under which conditional stimulus control by the sample stimuli in three-key matching-to-sample paradigms would generalize across the different possible sample locations. In Experiments 1 and 2, the samples appeared on the left and right side keys during initial training and then on the center key during testing. Transfer of pigeons' matching performances to the center-key samples was evident after both identity and symbolic matching training. In Experiment 3, pigeons trained on symbolic matching with two side-key samples or with a side-key and a center-key sample generally transferred their learned matching performances to those samples when they subsequently appeared in the remaining (novel) location. These results indicate that, when two-choice conditional discriminations are learned with more than one sample location, the visual characteristics of the sample per se predominantly come to control the pigeons' comparison choices. This finding encourages the use of the multiple-location training procedure as a way of reducing control by location, thus providing a more discriminating test of symmetry in animals.     

Use of an ambiguous-sample procedure to establish a cue to forget in pigeons

Pigeons were trained on a variation of the matching-to-sample task in which on double-sample trials two samples, one associated with each of the comparison stimuli, were presented successively. Responding to the comparison associated with the first sample was reinforced on half the double-sample trials, and responding to the comparison associated with the second sample was reinforced on the remaining half. One of two postsample stimuli was presented following the termination of each colored sample. A vertical line was presented after a correct or target sample, and a horizontal line was presented after an incorrect or interfering sample. With extended training, each bird demonstrated above-chance accuracy on double-sample trials, providing prima facie evidence that one or both of the postsample stimuli exerted control over matching behavior. Experiment 2 provided evidence that the horizontal line functioned as a cue to forget the code activated by the preceding sample stimulus. It was concluded that a condition sufficient to establish a postsample stimulus as a cue to forget is that the postsample immediately follow presentation of a sample that, if it were to control test responding, would lead to nonreinforcement.     

Quantification of the effects of chlorpromazine on performance under delayed matching to sample in pigeons.

The effects of four doses of chlorpromazine (dose range 0.5 to 12.5 mg/kg) on performance under a delayed matching-to-sample procedure in pigeons was investigated, using the exponential model of memory (White, 1985). Performance was measured using a bias-free measure of discriminability, log d (Davison & Tustin, 1978), and negative exponential functions were fitted to individual-subject and group data at each dose level. A decrease in matching accuracy was found to be caused by an increase in the rate of forgetting, b, and a decrease in the initial discriminability, log d0. Changes in rate of forgetting and discriminability occurred at doses that had no statistically significant effect on response latency. The exponential model of memory accounted well for the data and provided a useful way of quantifying the effects of chlorpromazine on the processes involved in delayed matching-to-sample performance.     

Most directed forgetting in pigeons can be attributed to the absence of reinforcement on forget trials during training or to other procedural artifacts.

In research on directed forgetting in pigeons using delayed matching procedures, remember cues, presented in the delay interval between sample and comparisons, have been followed by comparisons (i.e., a memory test), whereas forget cues have been followed by one of a number of different sample-independent events. The source of directed forgetting in delayed matching to sample in pigeons was examined in a 2 x 2 design by independently manipulating whether or not forget-cue trials in training ended with reinforcement and whether or not forget-cue trials in training included a simultaneous discrimination (involving stimuli other than those used in the matching task). Results were consistent with the hypothesis that reinforced responding following forget cues is sufficient to eliminate performance deficits on forget-cue probe trials. Only when reinforcement was omitted on forget-cue trials in training (whether a discrimination was required or not) was there a decrement in accuracy on forget-cue probe trials. When reinforcement is present, however, the pattern of responding established during and following a forget cue in training may also play a role in the directed forgetting effect. These findings support the view that much of the evidence for directed forgetting using matching procedures may result from motivational and behavioral artifacts rather than the loss of memory.     

Stimulus control and response bias in an analogue prey-detection procedure

The present study compared the performance of 6 pigeons trained to detect luminance differences in two different signal-detection procedures. Exposed to a three-key array, the pigeons were trained to peck the left key when the brighter of two light intensities had been presented on the center key and to peck the right key when the dimmer of two light intensities had been presented on the center key. Procedure A was a standard signal-detection procedure in which left/bright and right/dim responses produced food reinforcement and left/dim and right/bright responses produced periods of timeout. Procedure B was designed to simulate some of the contingencies operating in a prey-detection situation. Left-key responses produced reinforcement following the brighter center-key stimulus and a period of timeout following the dimmer center-key stimulus. Right-key responses always produced a short period of timeout irrespective of the stimulus. Within each procedure, the duration of timeout arranged for false alarms (left/dim responses) was varied between 3 s and 120 s. Measures of accuracy and response bias were compared between the two procedures. The timeout manipulation produced systematic, but relatively small, changes in these measures when right/dim responses (i.e., correct rejections) produced reinforcement (Procedure A). Arranging timeout for right/dim responses in Procedure B produced greater variability in accuracy and response bias than did arranging reinforcement, but this variability was not related to timeout duration. Overall, discrimination accuracy was considerably higher when right/dim responses produced timeout than when they resulted in reinforcement, and accuracy was accompanied by a large bias toward the response associated with reinforcement. These results are consistent with a recently proposed model of signal detection.     

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.     

The development of emergent differential sample behavior in pigeons

Three experiments attempted to replicate Manabe, Kawashima, and Staddon's (1995) finding of emergent differential sample behavior in budgerigars that has been interpreted as evidence of functional equivalence class formation. In Experiments 1 and 2, pigeons initially learned two-sample/ two-alternative matching to sample in which comparison presentation was contingent on pecking one sample on a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedule and the other on a fixed-ratio (FR) schedule. Later, two new samples were added to the task. Comparison presentation on these trials occurred after the first sample peck following a predetermined interval (Experiment 1) or after completion of either the DRL or FR requirement, whichever occurred first (Experiment 2). Experiment 1 found no evidence for emergent spaced versus rapid responding to the new samples as they established conditional control over the familiar choices. By contrast, differential responding did emerge for some pigeons in Experiment 2, with responding to each new sample coinciding with the pattern explicitly conditioned to the original sample occasioning the same comparison choice. This emergent effect, however, disappeared for most pigeons with continued training. Experiment 3 systematically replicated Experiment 2 using differential peck location as the sample behavior. Differential location pecking emerged to the new samples for most pigeons and remained intact throughout training. Our findings demonstrate a viable pigeon analogue to the budgerigar emergent calling paradigm and are discussed in terms of equivalence- and non-equivalence-based processes.     

Detecting a nonevent: Delayed presence-versus-absence discrimination in pigeons

Eight pigeons were trained on a delayed presence-versus-absence discrimination paradigm in which a sample stimulus was presented on some trials but not on others. If a sample was presented, then a response to one choice key produced food. If no sample was presented, a response to the other choice key produced food. The basic finding was that performance remained constant and well above 50% correct on no-sample trials as the retention interval increased, whereas performance dropped precipitously (to below 50% correct) on sample trials. In the second phase of the experiment, all of the trials were no-sample trials, and reinforcers were delivered probabilistically for one group of pigeons and according to time-based schedules for the other group. The exact reinforcement probabilities used in Phase 2 were those calculated to be in effect on no-sample trials in Phase 1 (according to a discrete-state model of performance). Subjects did not show exclusive preference for the richer alternative on no-sample trials in the first phase, but those in the probabilistic group developed near-exclusive preference for the richer alternative during the second phase. These data are inconsistent with the predictions of the discrete-state model, but are easily accommodated by an account based on signal detection theory, which also can be applied effectively to discrimination of event duration and the “subjective shortening” effect.     

Relational discrimination by pigeons in a go/no-go procedure with compound stimuli: a methodological note

A go/no‐go procedure with compound stimuli typically establishes emergent behavior that parallels in structure and typical outcome that of conventional tests for symmetric, transitive, and equivalence relations in normally capable adults. The present study employed a go/no‐go compound stimulus procedure with pigeons. During training, pecks to two‐component compounds A1B1, A2B2, B1C1, and B2C2 were followed by food. Pecks to compounds A1B2, A2B1, B1C2, and B2C1 re‐started the 30‐s stimulus presentation interval. The absence of pecking to those compounds for 30 s ended the trial. Subsequent tests presented these components in new spatial arrangements and/or in recombinative compounds that together corresponded to conventional tests of symmetry, transitivity, and equivalence: B1A1, B2A2, C1B1, C2B2, A1C1, A2C2, C1A1, C2A2 vs. B1A2, B2A1, C1B2, C2B1, A1C2, A2C1, C1A2, C2A1 (positive vs. negative instances of symmetric, transitive, and equivalence relations). On tests for symmetric relations, all pigeons behaved in a manner consistent with training on both positive instances (i.e., by responding) and on negative instances (i.e., by not responding). By contrast, the pigeons' behavior on tests for transitivity and equivalence was inconsistent with baseline training, thus failing to show the recombinative discrimination performance that is typical of normally capable humans when trained and tested using the go/no‐go procedure with compound stimuli.     

Stimulus Effects On Behavior Allocation In Three-alternative Choice

Six pigeons were trained on three-alternative concurrent variable-interval schedules that were available through a switching response and were signaled by colored stimuli. The discriminative stimuli for two of the schedules were always 560 nm and 630 nm, but the stimulus signaling the third alternative was varied across conditions over seven levels between these colors. For each third-alternative stimulus condition, the relative frequency of reinforcers was varied over three conditions with 4:1 and 16:1 reinforcer ratios between each pair of alternatives. The distribution of responses between the alternatives was dependent jointly on the third-alternative reinforcer rate and on the disparity between the stimulus signaling the third alternative and those signaling the other alternatives. A generalized matching approach was unable to provide invariant measures of the discriminability between constant stimuli, but a contingency-discriminability approach provided excellent fits and sensible and invariant stimulus discriminability measures.