Discrimination of methadone and cocaine by pigeons without explicit discrimination training.

Pigeons were trained to peck a key on a variable-interval 2-min schedule of food reinforcement. Prior to each session, either 2.0 mg/kg methadone (n = 3), 3.0 mg/kg cocaine (n = 4), or 5.6 mg/kg cocaine (n = 2) was administered. When each pigeon's rate of pecking was stable, a range of doses of the training drug and saline were administered prior to 20-min extinction sessions separated by at least four training sessions. Rate of pecking during these extinction tests was generally an increasing function of dose, with the lowest rates obtained following saline and low doses and the highest rates obtained following doses near the training doses. Dose functions from pigeons trained with 5.6 mg/kg cocaine were steeper than those from pigeons trained with 3.0 mg/kg cocaine. Pigeons trained with methadone or 3.0 mg/kg cocaine were then given discrimination training, in which food reinforcement followed drug administration and 20-min extinction sessions followed saline administration. Rates of pecking under these conditions quickly diverged until near-zero rates were obtained following saline and high rates were obtained following drug. Discrimination training steepened dose functions for the training drugs, and the effects of several other substituted drugs depended on the pharmacology of the training drug. The pigeons trained with 5.6 mg/kg cocaine were tested with d-amphetamine, methadone, and morphine prior to discrimination training. d-Amphetamine increased rates dose dependently, and methadone and morphine did not. The results suggest that discriminative control by methadone and cocaine was established without explicit discrimination training.     

Factors affecting conditional discrimination learning by pigeons

In Experiment 1 (within subjects) and Experiment 2 (between subjects) it was shown that the sequential training of pigeons on a color discrimination and then on its reversal, each in a different floor-tilt/texture context, failed to produce conditional control of discriminative performance by those contexts. Daily alternation between the two problems (with correlated contexts) was successful, however. In each of these experiments conditional control was better reflected in generalization test performance in extinction than during sessions of training with reinforcement.     

Observational learning of two visual discriminations by pigeons: a within-subjects design.

Pigeon's observational learning of successive visual discrimination was studied using within-subject comparisons of data from three experimental conditions. Two pairs of discriminative stimuli were used; each bird was exposed to two of the three experimental conditions, with different pairs of stimuli used in a given bird's two conditions. In one condition, observers were exposed to visual discriminative stimuli only. In a second condition, subjects were exposed to a randomly alternating sequence of two stimuli where the one that would subsequently be used as S+ was paired with the operation of the grain magazine. In a third experimental condition, subjects were exposed to the performance of a conspecific in the operant discrimination procedure. After exposures to conspecific performances, there was facilitation of discriminative learning, relative to that which followed exposures to stimulus and reinforcement sequences or exposures to stimulus sequences alone. Exposure to stimulus and food-delivery sequences enhanced performance relative to exposure to stimulus sequences alone. The differential effects of these three types of exposure were not attributable to order effects or to task difficulty; rather, they clearly were due to the type of exposure.     

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.     

Reaction times of pigeons on a wavelength discrimination task

After extensive pretraining, three pigeons were exposed in 2-second trials to a random series of 14 light wavelengths, ranging in one nanometer (nm) steps from 575 nanometers to 589 nanometers. Responses to one of the wavelengths, 582 nanometers, were intermittently reinforced. The relative frequency of response approached 1.0 at 582 nanometers, and decreased with progressively higher and lower wavelengths. Reaction times shorter than about 0.2 second occurred with a low frequency that was largely independent of wavelength. Wavelength controlled the frequency of longer reaction times, but did not affect the distribution of these reaction times. Consequently, receiver-operating characteristic curves constructed by using reaction time as a rating measure did not conform to the signal-detection model, in contrast to such conformity when response rate is used in a similar way. The data suggest that stimulus onset as such triggers early response emission with some small probability; the probability of responses with longer latency is controlled by wavelength, but their time of emission is controlled by some independent process.     

Short-term remembering of discriminative stimuli in pigeons.

Pigeons learned to peck the left or right of two white keys depending on whether a red or a green stimulus was displayed on a third key. The opportunity to peck the white keys was then dealyed for zero to six seconds after the red or green (to-be-remembered) stimulus. On half the trials, the feeder operated during the delay to interrupt behavior that might mediate discriminated responding. No events were scheduled on the remaining trials. In a later condition, the pigeons had the opportunity to peck the white keys during the delay. In general, accuracy decreased as delay increased in all conditions, but performance was least accurate following feeder operations and most accurate when pecking was allowed during the delay. The procedures may be analogous to varying the opportunity for rehearsal in studies of human short-term memory.     

Stimulus effects on concurrent performance in transition

Six experimentally naive pigeons were exposed to concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules in a three-key procedure in which food reinforcement followed pecks on the side keys and pecks on the center key served as changeover responses. In Phase 1, 3 birds were exposed to 20 combinations of five variable-interval values, with each variable-interval value consistently associated with a different color on the side keys. Another 3 pigeons were exposed to the same 20 conditions, but with a more standard procedure that used a nondifferential discriminative stimulus on the two side keys throughout all conditions. In Phase 2, the differential and nondifferential stimulus conditions were reversed for each pigeon. Each condition lasted for one 5-hr session and one subsequent 1-hr session. In the last 14 conditions of each phase, the presence of differential discriminative stimuli decreased the time necessary for differential responding to develop and increased the sensitivity of behavior to reinforcement distribution in the 1st hr of training; during the last hours of training in each condition, however, the effects of the differential discriminative stimuli could not be distinguished from the effects of reinforcement distribution per se. These results show the importance of studying transitions in behavior as well as final performance. They may also be relevant to discrepancies in the results of previous experiments that have used nonhuman and human subjects.     

Stimulus generalization from feeder to response key in the acquisition of autoshaped pecking

During autoshaping, a 6-second presentation of one stimulus and a variable time 30-second presentation of a second stimulus alternated in appearance on a pigeon key. Grain always was delivered for 3 seconds at the end of the first stimulus interval. In the first experiment, autoshaped pecking of the stimulus preceding grain delivery began much sooner when that stimulus was a black vertical line on a white background and the other stimulus was green than when the opposite stimulus arrangement was used. Because these two stimuli differed in form, hue, brightness, and similarity in hue and brightness to the illumination of the raised feeder, three subsequent experiments examined whether the differential speed of autoshaping in the two groups was due to a feature-positive, feature-negative effect, a preference for brighter over darker stimuli, a simple preference for white over green, or stimulus generalization from the brightness or hue of the illuminated, raised feeder to the stimulus on the key preceding grain delivery. The data from these experiments showed that the first autoshaped key peck was most likely to be made to the stimulus of the same hue as that illuminating the feeder, regardless of whether that stimulus was positively or negatively associated with grain delivery. At least under some conditions, therefore, stimulus-generalization mediated response transfer of pecking grain in the presence of the hue illuminating the feeder to pecking the key illuminated by a similar hue appears to account for the occurrence of autoshaped key pecking.     

Delayed temporal discrimination in pigeons: A comparison of two procedures

A within-subjects comparison was made of pigeons' performance on two temporal discrimination procedures that were signaled by differently colored keylight samples. During stimulus trials, a peck on the key displaying a slanted line was reinforced following short keylight samples, and a peck on the key displaying a horizontal line was reinforced following long keylight samples, regardless of the location of the stimuli on those two choice keys. During position trials, a peck on the left key was reinforced following short keylight samples and a peck on the right key was reinforced following long keylight samples, regardless of which line stimulus appeared on the correct key. Thus, on stimulus trials, the correct choice key could not be discriminated prior to the presentation of the test stimuli, whereas on position trials, the correct choice key could be discriminated during the presentation of the sample stimulus. During Phase 1, with a 0-s delay between sample and choice stimuli, discrimination learning was faster on position trials than on stimulus trials for all 4 birds. During Phase 2, 0-, 0.5-, and 1.0-s delays produced differential loss of stimulus control under the two tasks for 2 birds. Response patterns during the delay intervals provided some evidence for differential mediation of the two delayed discriminations. These between-task differences suggest that the same processes may not mediate performance in each.     

Stimulus duration as a measure of stimulus generalization

Four pigeons in the line-positive group were trained with a vertical line on a green background that signalled intermittent reinforcement while a plain green field signalled extinction. Four pigeons in the line-negative group were trained with the opposite discrimination. Response to a control key terminated any trial and initiated the next trial. The birds also used the control key during generalization tests to control the durations of trials in which various line orientations were presented. These durations were summed to provide generalization gradients of stimulus duration that were positive or negative in accordance with the trained discriminations. In Experiment 2, birds from the line-positive group were tested with a procedure in which the control key was not available on some trials. This provided an independent assessment of response rates to the test stimuli. These rates were used to predict the stimulus durations obtained when the control key was available. The findings supported a general model for the prediction of response distributions among concurrent stimuli from rates observed with single stimuli.     

Brightness contrast: a reinterpretation of compound cue and combined cue experiments with pigeons.

A group of three pigeons was trained on a 4-ply multiple schedule: a green color and a vertical line superimposed upon an achromatic background as positive stimuli, and a red color and a horizontal line on an achromatic background as negative stimuli. The pigeons were tested with the vertical line superimposed upon different achromatic background intensities, then with the vertical line superimposed upon different green background intensities, and finally with the vertical line and its training achromatic backgfound attenuated (and unattenuated) by a neutral density filter. The gradients peaked at the luminance of the achromatic background used during training and at the equivalent luminance for the green background when it was substituted for the achromatic background. The brightness contrast, not the background luminance, was the critical variable as the neutral density filter attenuated both the line and the background equally, leaving brightness contrast unchanged; there was no response decrement to this attenuated stimulus. Two other groups of three pigeons showed that they attended to line orientation as well as to brightness contrast. The brightness contrast hypothesis was extended to explain results of attention experiments and combined cue experiments which have used line stimuli in combinations with different backgrounds.     

Time-place learning by pigeons, Columba livia

In each of two experiments, 2 pigeons received discrimination training in which food reinforcement for key pecking was conditional upon both spatial and temporal cues. In Experiment 1, food was available for periods of 30 s at each of three locations (pecking keys) during trials that lasted 90 s. In Experiment 2, food was available for periods of 15 min at each of four locations (pecking keys) during a 60-min trial. In both experiments, pigeons' key pecking was jointly controlled by the spatial and temporal cues. These data, and other recent experiments, suggest that animals learn relationships between temporal and spatial cues that predict stable patterns of food availability.     

Discrimination and differentiation of response number in stimulus directed pecking of pigeons.

In Experiment 1, autoshaping trials terminated with food only if pigeons emitted more than a target number of responses during a trial in one condition and fewer than a target number in another. The median number of responses per trial shifted in accordance wtih the requirements. The responding of yoked-control birds that received response-independent reinforcers did not vary with the response requirements. In Experiment 2, the number of responses in autoshaping trial became the discriminative stimulus for reinforcement in the second component of a chained schedule. In one condition, responding was reinforced only if the number of responses in the first component was above a target value; in the other condition, responding was reinforced only if the number was below the target value. The distribution of the first-component response numbers did not shift systematically between discrimination conditions, but response rates in the second component indicated that the number of responses in the autoshaping trial was a discriminable property behavior.     

Category discrimination by pigeons using five polymorphous features

Eight pigeons were trained to discriminate between sets of color photographs of natural scenes. The scenes differed along five two-valued dimensions (site, weather, camera distance, camera orientation, and camera height), and all combinations of the feature values were used. One value of each dimension was designated as positive, and slides containing three or more positive feature values were members of the positive stimulus set. Thus, each feature had an equal, low, correlation with reinforcement, and all features had zero correlations with each other. Seven of the 8 pigeons learned this discrimination, and their responding came under the control of all five features. Within the positive and negative stimulus sets, response rates were higher to stimuli that contained more positive feature values. Once discrimination had been achieved, reversal training was given using a subset of the slides. In this subset, only a single feature was correlated with reinforcement. All pigeons learned this reversal successfully and generalized it to additional photographs with the same feature content. After reversal, the original reinforcement contingencies were reinstated, and training was continued using all the slides except those that had been used in reversal. Reversal generalized to these slides to some extent. Analysis of the response rates to individual slides showed that, compared with prereversal training, only the feature that had been subjected to reversal contingencies showed a reversed correlation with response rate. The remaining features showed the same correlation with response rate as they had before reversal training. Thus, reversal on some members of a category following category discrimination training led to generalization to stimuli within the category that were not involved in the reversal, but not to features that were not reversed. It is therefore inappropriate to refer to the pigeons as learning a concept.     

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.     

Stimulus control of the pigeon's ability to peck a moving target.

Two pigeons were trained to peck whichever of eight keys displayed a white field (SD). The other seven keys displayed a white "X" on a black background (S delta). Each peck to SD produced three-second access to grain, a three-second intertrial interval (ITI), and the next trial. Pecks to S delta produced a three-second timeout (TO) and the same trial. During later sessions the key displaying SD changed every t seconds (t = 3, 2, 1, .5, and .25 sec), requiring the birds to track the position of the SD. Pecks on a ninth key increased t. Several sessions employed novel stimuli to ascertain the controlling stimulus dimensions. Both birds made few errors acquiring the original discrimination. During the tracking sessions, both birds made few errors when t = .5 sec. Only one reliably lengthened t. Data from sessions with novel stimuli indicate that color and form were important aspects of SD and S delta respectively; movement contributed to the final performance.     

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.     

Construction of equal-hue discriminability scales for the pigeon.

Equal-hue discriminability steps for the pigeon are shown as tabular entries that can be summed or interpolated to produce sequences of equal discriminability steps of various step size. Equal-hue discriminability sequences can be constructed where the number of stimuli and spectral range are specified, or where an interval in one spectral region is to be equated to an interval in another spectral region.     

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.     

A clarification of continuous repertoire development

The key-peck response of five pigeons was reinforced on a schedule whenever the interval between pecks at two response keys was between 1.0 and 2.33 seconds in the presence of a 2,500-Hertz tone or between 4.66 and 6.0 seconds in the presence of a 1250-Hertz tone. There was no tendency for responses of intermediate duration to occur when test tones of intermediate frequency were presented. This result clarifies a previous finding using a similar procedure but with a visual intensity stimulus dimension.