Negative patterning is easier than a biconditional discrimination

Two groups of rats were trained for 50 days on different discriminations in a magazine approach paradigm. One group was trained with a negative patterning schedule and a positive patterning schedule concurrently: they received intermixed trials of A+, B+, AB-, C-, D-, CD+ (A, B, C, and D are four distinct stimuli; the plus sign denotes reinforcement with food, and the minus sign denotes nonreinforcement). The second group of rats was trained with the same four stimuli arranged as compounds and reinforced according to the biconditional schedule AB+, CD+, AC-, and BD-. The first group learned the positive patterning schedule much more quickly than the negative patterning schedule, but they learned the negative patterning schedule more effectively than the second group learned the biconditional schedule. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for models of stimulus representation.     

Group choice: the ideal free distribution of human social behavior

Group choice refers to the distribution of group members between two choice alternatives over time. The ideal free distribution (IFD), an optimal foraging model from behavioral ecology, predicts that the ratio of foragers at two resource sites should equal the ratio of obtained resources, a prediction that is formally analogous to the matching law of individual choice, except that group choice is a social phenomenon. Two experiments investigated the usefulness of IFD analyses of human group choice and individual-based explanations that might account for the group-level events. Instead of nonhuman animals foraging at two sites for resources, a group of humans chose blue and red cards to receive points that could earn cash prizes. The groups chose blue and red cards in ratios in positive relation to the ratios of points associated with the cards. When group choice ratios and point ratios were plotted on logarithmic coordinates and fitted with regression lines, the slopes (i.e., sensitivity measures) approached 1.0 but tended to fall short of it (i.e., undermatching), with little bias and little unaccounted for variance. These experiments demonstrate that an IFD analysis of group choice is possible and useful, and suggest that group choice may be explained by the individual members' tendency to optimize reinforcement.     

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.     

Transitive inference by pigeons: Does the geometric presentation of the stimuli make a difference?

In studies of transitive inference (TI), nonhuman animals are typically trained with the following 5-term task: A+B?, B+C?, C+D?, D+E? where the letters stand for arbitrary stimuli and [+] indicates that choice is reinforced and [?] indicates that choice is not reinforced. A TI effect is found when, given the untrained test pair BD, subjects choose B. TI effects have been found in many nonhuman species. Although reinforcement history has been posited as an account of the TI effect, it has failed to account for a variety of conditions under which TI effects have been found. A more cognitive account of TI is that organisms are able to form a representation of the series (A > B > C > D > E). In support of this hypothesis, Roberts and Phelps (Psychol Sci 5:368–374, 1994) found that presentation of the pairs of stimuli in a linear arrangement facilitated TI performance by rats, whereas presentation of the pairs of stimuli in a circular arrangement did not. Using methods adapted from Roberts and Phelps, we trained pigeons on either a linear or a circular arrangement of stimuli with the 5-term task. Results indicated that on the BD test pair, pigeons trained with a circular arrangement did not differ from those trained with a linear arrangement. Furthermore, we found that memory for training pairs was variable and was highly correlated with degree of TI. The results suggest that regardless of how pigeons are able to represent the stimuli, choice was not affected by the spatial arrangement of the stimuli during training.     

Magnitude of negative reinforcement and resistance to extinction

In the first experiment rats experienced large or small magnitude of negative reinforcement (shock reduction) in a straight alley. Half of the subjects in each magnitude group received continuous reinforcement, and the other half received a 50% partial reinforcement schedule (nonreinforcement consisting of no shock reduction in the goal box). In extinction the groups were ordered: large partial > small-partial > small-continuous > large-continuous. In the second experiment rats received large, small and nonreinforcement in various sequences using the runway-negative reinforcement procedure and were ordered: SNL>LNL>SNL>LNS in resistance to extinction (letters represent the magnitudes in the sequence experienced in acquisition). The results of these experiments indicate a commality between positive and negative reinforcement with respect to behavioral phenomena and theoretical accounts of those phenomena.     

Do wild New Caledonian crows (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Corvus moneduloides</Emphasis>) attend to the functional properties of their tools?

New Caledonian crows are the most proficient non-hominin tool manufacturers but the cognition behind their remarkable skills remains largely unknown. Here we investigate if they attend to the functional properties of the tools that they routinely use in the wild. Pandanus tools have natural barbs along one edge that enable them to function as hooking implements when the barbs face backwards from the working tip. In experiment 1 we presented eight crows with either a non-functional (‘upside-down’) or a functional pandanus tool in a baited hole. Four of the crows never flipped the tools. The behaviour of the four flipping birds suggested that they had a strategy of flipping a tool when it was not working. Observations of two of the eight crows picking up pandanus tools at feeding tables in the wild supported the lack of attention to barb direction. In experiment 2 we gave six of the eight crows a choice of either a barbed or a barbless pandanus tool. Five of the crows chose tools at random, which further supported the findings in experiment 1 that the crows paid little or no attention to the barbs. In contrast, a third experiment found that seven out of eight crows flipped non-functional stick tools significantly more than functional ones. Our findings indicate that the crows do not consistently attend to the presence or orientation of barbs on pandanus tools. Successful pandanus tool use in the wild seems to rely on behavioural strategies formed through associative learning, including procedural knowledge about the sequence of operations required to make a successful pandanus tool. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

A test of transitive inferences in free-flying honeybees: unsuccessful performance due to memory constraints

We asked whether honeybees, Apis mellifera, could solve a transitive inference problem. Individual free-flying bees were conditioned with four overlapping premise pairs of five visual patterns in a multiple discrimination task (A+ vs. B-, B+ vs. C-, C+ vs. D-, D+ vs. E-, where + and - indicate sucrose reward or absence of it, respectively). They were then tested with the nonadjacent pairs A vs. E and B vs. D. Preference of B to D is consistent with the use of the implicit hierarchy A > B > C > D > E. Equal choice of B and D supports choice based on the associative strength of the stimuli. The bees' choice was determined by their memory constraints: experience with the last premise pair (D+ vs. E-) predominated. In the tests, bees preferred A to E and chose equally B and D. An analysis of the performance in terms of a reward/penalty ratio showed that B had a higher associative strength than D. Thus, bees do not establish transitive inferences but, rather, guide their choices by the joint action of a recency effect and the associative strength of the stimuli. The former supports choice of D, whereas the latter supports choice of B, thus determining equal choice of B and D in the tests.     

Percentage reinforcement and choice

Pigeons responded on identical concurrent variable-interval schedules (choice phase), producing outcomes of either periodic reinforcement schedules always terminating in reinforcement (reliable schedule) or otherwise identical schedules providing reinforcement on only a percentage of instances (percentage reinforcement schedule). Comparisons of this type constituted two assessments of the generality of preference for percentage reinforcement reported by Kendall (1974). In a third set of conditions, a reliable schedule was pitted against a percentage reinforcement schedule in which the more negative outcome was a leaner schedule of reinforcement (rather than nonreinforcement, as in the other two conditions). In all three types of conditions, the schedule providing the higher rate of reinforcement was preferred. Results from a subsequent manipulation suggest that Kendall's contrasting results may have depended on the fact that the stimuli in his choice phase (unlit keys) were physically identical to the stimulus correlated with the nonchosen outcome in his outcome phase.     

Responses of urban crows to con- and hetero-specific alarm calls in predator and non-predator zoo enclosures

Urban animals and birds in particular are able to cope with diverse novel threats in a city environment such as avoiding novel, unfamiliar predators. Predator avoidance often includes alarm signals that can be used also by hetero-specifics, which is mainly the case in mixed-species flocks. It can also occur when species do not form flocks but co-occur together. In this study we tested whether urban crows use alarm calls of conspecifics and hetero-specifics (jackdaws, Corvus monedula) differently in a predator and a non-predator context with partly novel and unfamiliar zoo animal species. Birds were tested at the Tiergarten Schönbrunn in the city of Vienna by playing back con- and hetero-specific alarm calls and control stimuli (great tit song and no stimuli) at predator (wolf, polar bear) and non-predator (eland antelope and cranes, peccaries) enclosures. We recorded responses of crows as the percentage of birds flying away after hearing the playback (out of those present before the playback) and as the number of vocalizations given by the present birds. A significantly higher percentage of crows flew away after hearing either con- or hetero-specific alarm calls, but it did not significantly differ between the predator and the non-predator context. Crows treated jackdaw calls just as crow calls, indicating that they make proper use of hetero-specific alarm calls. Responding similarly in both contexts may suggest that the crows were uncertain about the threat a particular zoo animal represents and were generally cautious. In the predator context, however, a high percentage of crows also flew away upon hearing the great tit control song which suggests that they may still evaluate those species which occasionally killed crows as more dangerous and respond to any conspicuous sound.     

Are monkeys aesthetists? Rensch (1957) revisited

Three experiments assessed whether capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) and squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) prefer regular and symmetrical visual patterns. Pictorial representations of faces were included in 1 stimulus set. When the monkeys could pick up and manipulate small cards bearing the stimuli, all preferences expressed by capuchins and most of those expressed by squirrel monkeys were for regular stimuli. Symmetry of the patterns was influential but not essential. Some preferences were also found for faces. When images of the patterns were presented on a touch screen, capuchins continued to express preferences especially for regular and symmetrical stimuli, but they showed some avoidance of faces. Squirrel monkeys responded less discriminatingly to the touch screen stimuli. The findings provide support for B. Rensch's (1957) claim that monkeys prefer visual stimuli that humans find aesthetically pleasing.     

Preference for intermittent reinforcement

Two experiments were conducted demonstrating that under certain conditions pigeons may peck at a higher rate on a key that produces intermittent reinforcement following a delay than on one that always produces reinforcement following the same delay duration. In both experiments, concurrent chain schedules were employed. In Experiment I, a single peck on one key led to a white light and a delay of 15 sec, which always terminated with food. A peck on the other key led to its illumination by one of two colored lights and a delay period of 15 sec. The delay was followed by either food presentation or timeout, either one lasting 3 sec. In a control group, the lights on this key were not correlated with food or timeout. Under the correlated stimuli, birds more often pecked the key leading to intermittent reinforcement, whereas with uncorrelated stimuli they pecked the key leading to the white light and 100% reinforcement. In Experiment II, concurrent variable-interval schedules were employed in the first link. The results showed generally that the relative rate was higher on the key leading to intermittent reinforcement when the stimuli were correlated with reinforcement and timeout than on the key leading to 100% reinforcement. There was some indication that this performance was affected by (1) the duration of the delay, (2) the percentage of reinforcement on the key yielding the higher percentage of reinforcement (the key with the white light), and (3) prior experimental conditions.     

Alan Baron: A pioneer in translational science

Primates take longer to choose between alternatives with smaller differences in value. This effect—a particular instance of the distance effect in symbolic comparisons—has not been replicated in birds. Instead, birds appear to respond independently to each alternative, such that the latency to choose depends primarily on the alternative of highest value. Three experiments tested for the distance effect in pigeons under conditions not previously considered. Experiment 1 presented pigeons with forced‐ and binary free‐choice trials, where each alternative was one of three possible delays to reinforcement (4, 8, and 16 s). Pigeons were exposed to the choice stimuli for different amounts of time and with different sample response requirements prior to the choice response. Experiment 2 added a fourth (0‐s delay) alternative. Experiment 3 substituted the 16‐s delay with a second 4‐s delay. In all experiments, pigeons systematically chose the shortest delay to reinforcement. Latency to choose the 4‐s delay did not vary when choosing against the 8‐s or 16‐s delay, regardless of whether choice stimuli were exposed for the duration of nine pecks (Experiment 1), or whether a 0‐s delay alternative was sometimes present (Experiment 2). Latency to choose the preferred of two identical alternatives (4‐s vs. 4‐s) was shorter than the latency to choose between different alternatives (4‐s vs. 8‐s; Experiment 3); this is the opposite of a distance effect. These results show no evidence of a distance effect in pigeon choice, consistent with the hypothesis that pigeons respond independently to each choice alternative.     

Choice and response contingencies

Two experiments investigated the extent to which response contingencies influence the choice between two schedules of reinforcement by exposing pigeons to a concurrent-chains procedure in which reinforcers in one terminal link were response-independent, and in the other terminal link, response-dependent. In Experiment 1, the pigeons were indifferent between an aperiodic, response-independent schedule and an aperiodic, response-dependent schedule that required a minimum rate of responding. This finding limits the generality of a required-rate contingency as a determinant of choice, which contingency had been previously demonstrated in a context of periodic reinforcement to evoke preference for an alternate schedule. In Experiment 2, the pigeons preferred a periodic, response-independent schedule to a periodic, response-dependent schedule that shared a feature with a required-rate schedule: there was a requirement to respond early in the interreinforcement interval, when responding produced reinforcement only later. The results of the two experiments suggest the following general interpretation: pigeons prefer a second schedule to the extent that the response contingencies of the first schedule must be satisfied during discriminable periods of nonreinforcement.     

When logic fails: Implicit transitive inference in humans

Transitive inference (TI) in animals (e.g., choosing A over C on the basis of knowing that A is better than B and B is better than C) has been interpreted by some as reflecting a declarative logical inference process. We invert this anthropomorphic interpretation by providing evidence that humans can exhibit TI-like behavior on the basis of simpler associative mechanisms that underlie many theories of animal learning. In this study, human participants were trained on a five-pair TI problem (A+B-, B+C-, C+D-, D+E-, E+F-) and, unlike in previous human TI studies, were prevented from becoming explicitly aware of the logical hierarchy, so they could not employ logical reasoning. They were then tested with three problems: B versus D, B versus E, and C versus E. Participants only reliably chose B over E, whereas the other test conditions yielded chance performance. This result is inconsistent with the use of logical reasoning and is instead consistent with an account developed to explain earlier TI studies with rats that found the same pattern of results. In this account, choice performance is based on differential associative strengths across the stimulus items that develop over training, despite equal overt reinforcement.     

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.     

Concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules can provide only weak evidence for matching

Herrnstein and Heyman (1979) showed that when pigeons' pecking is reinforced on concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules, (1) their behavior ratios match the ratio of the schedules' reinforcer frequencies, and (2) there is more responding on the variable interval. Since maximizing the reinforcement rate would require responding more on the variable ratio, these results were presented as establishing the primacy of matching over maximizing. In the present report, different ratios of behavior were simulated on a computer to see how they would affect reinforcement rates on these concurrent schedules. Over a wide range of experimenter-specified choice ratios, matching obtained — a result suggesting that changes in choice allocation produced changes in reinforcer frequencies that correspond to the matching outcome. Matching also occurred at arbitrarily selected choice ratios when reinforcement rates were algebraically determined by each schedule's reinforcement-feedback function. Additionally, three birds were exposed to concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules contingent on key pecking in which hopper durations were varied in some conditions to produce experimenter-specified choice ratios. Matching generally obtained between choice ratios and reinforcer-frequency ratios at these different choice ratios. By suggesting that reinforcer frequencies track choice on this procedure, instead of vice versa, this outcome questions whether matching-as-outcome was due to matching-as-process in the Herrnstein and Heyman study.     

Absolute and relative perceptual codes in young children

Three experiments were conducted to ascertain whether young children's perceptual codes, as evidenced by choice reaction times, were related to either the absolute difference or the ratio between stimuli. In Experiments 1 and 2, children were shown pairs of line lengths and were asked to choose either the longer or shorter line within each pair. In Experiment 3, children chose which of two birds on a map was closer to themselves or to the experimenter. In all three experiments, children's reaction times were related to both the absolute differences and ratios between pairs of stimuli. The findings suggest that perceptual judgments in young children may be based on both absolute and relational codes.     

The symmetrical law of effect and the matching relation in choice behavior

In a concurrent-chains procedure, pigeons chose between outcomes that differed in the rate of response-independent delivery of food and electric shocks. The application of functional measurement techniques confirmed the matching relation—between choice and rate of reinforcement value—for two of three pigeons. Scale values of the outcomes were extracted for the two birds that conformed to matching, and the value of a single occurrence of shock per minute—in terms of negative food units—was estimated. A second experiment with concurrent chains provided a test of these parameter estimates. The close correspondence between predicted and obtained choice behavior found in Experiment II indicated that the estimates of outcome value were indeed reliable. Both experiments together support the contention that the effects on choice behavior of positive and aversive stimuli appear to be equal, though opposite in sign.     

Right or wrong, familiar or novel in pictorial list discrimination learning

The interaction between nonassociative learning (presentation frequencies) and associative learning (reinforcement rates) in stimulus discrimination performance was investigated. Subjects were taught to discriminate lists of visual pattern pairs. When they chose the stimulus designated as right they were symbolically rewarded and when they chose the stimulus designated as wrong they were symbolically penalised. Subjects first learned one list and then another list. For a "right" group the pairs of the second list consisted of right stimuli from the first list and of novel wrong stimuli. For a "wrong" group it was the other way round. The right group transferred some discriminatory performance from the first to the second list while the control and wrong groups initially only performed near chance with the second list. When the first list involved wrong stimuli presented twice as frequently as right stimuli, the wrong group exhibited a better transfer than the right group. In a final experiment subjects learned lists which consisted of frequent right stimuli paired with scarce wrong stimuli and frequent wrong stimuli paired with scarce right stimuli. In later test trials these stimuli were shown in new combinations and additionally combined with novel stimuli. Subjects preferred to choose the most rewarded stimuli and to avoid the most penalised stimuli when the test pairs included at least one frequent stimulus. With scarce/scarce or scarce/novel stimulus combinations they performed less well or even chose randomly. A simple mathematical model that ascribes stimulus choices to a Cartesian combination of stimulus frequency and stimulus value succeeds in matching all these results with satisfactory precision.     

Establishing preference for unreliable reinforcement in adults with dual diagnoses

We evaluated the choice responding of three adults dually diagnosed with developmental and psychiatric disabilities using concurrent schedules of reinforcement. Specifically, participants were given a choice between a response option resulting in reliable reinforcement and a response option resulting in unreliable reinforcement. Our primary purpose was to shift preference from reliable to unreliable reinforcement via the systematic presentation of stimuli during delay intervals. A second purpose was to evaluate the effectiveness of intervening stimuli in shifting preference at differing delay-to-reinforcement intervals. Preference for unreliable reinforcement was first examined in the absence of stimulus presentations during delays, at three different delay values. Next, we aimed to establish preference for unreliable reinforcement by presenting pictures of reinforcers during delays preceding unreliable reinforcement. Preference was again examined at three different delay values. In the absence of stimulus presentations during delays, participants were shown to prefer reliable reinforcement, particularly at the longer delay value. When stimuli were presented during the delays, two of the three participants preferred unreliable reinforcement, particularly the longer the delay value. These results suggest that the presentation of intervening stimuli during delays may help facilitate tolerance for unreliable reinforcement.