Effect of proximity of elements on the feature-positive effect

Eight groups of pigeons were trained to discriminate between two stimulus displays that could be differentiated only by a single distinctive feature on one of the displays. For half of the pigeons, responses to displays containing the distinctive feature were reinforced (feature-positive), and for the remaining pigeons responses to displays without the distinctive feature were reinforced (feature-negative). The pigeons were further grouped so that half were presented displays in which the distinctive feature was in close proximity to other features (compact displays) and half were presented displays in which the features were not close together (distributed displays). Pigeons in the feature-positive groups localized responses on the distinctive feature of the displays and seldom responded to displays without the distinctive feature. Pigeons in the distributed feature-negative groups localized responses on features common to the two displays and did not learn the discrimination. Compacting the displays facilitated discrimination performance for the subjects in the feature-negative condition. Tests carried out in extinction indicated that responding in the compact feature-negative group was largely controlled by pattern rather than by the individual elements on the display.     

Verbal feedback and the feature-positive effect in children

A pair of displays having common elements may be differentiated by the presence of a distinctive feature in one of the displays. When required to discriminate between such displays presented simultaneously, young children more readily learn to confine their responses to the display containing the distinctive feature (feature-positive condition) than to the display which does not contain the distinctive feature (feature-negative condition). The effect of explicit verbal feedback for incorrect choices on the learning of discriminations of this type was examined in 3- to 5-year-old children. In the feature-positive case, explicit feedback for incorrect responses increased the tendency to respond directly to the distinctive feature when responding on the positive display and greatly reduced errors. In the feature-negative case, explicit feedback for incorrect responses increased the tendency to avoid the distinctive feature in favor of a common feature when responding on the negative display. In this case, however, consistent avoidance of the distinctive feature on the negative display was not always followed by the development of consistent choice of the positive display, and errors continued to occur at a high rate throughout training for most subjects. These results reflect the difference in the structure of the feature-positive and feature-negative tasks.     

Differential autoshaping to common and distinctive elements of positive and negative discriminative stimuli

The learning by hungry pigeons of a discrimination between two successively presented compound visual stimuli was investigated using a two-key autoshaping procedure. Common and distinctive stimulus elements were simultaneously presented on separate keys and either followed by food delivery, S+, or not, S−. The subjects acquired both between-trial and within-trial discriminations. On S+ trials, pigeons pecked the distinctive stimulus more than the common stimulus; before responding ceased on S− trials, they pecked the common stimulus more than the distinctive one. Mastery of the within-display discrimination during S+ trials preceded mastery of the between-trials discrimination. These findings extend the Jenkins-Sainsbury analysis of discriminations based upon a single distinguishing feature to discriminations in which common and distinctive elements are associated with both the positive and negative discriminative stimuli. The similarity of these findings to other effects found in autoshaping—approach to signals that forecast reinforcement and withdrawal from signals that forecast nonreinforcement—is also discussed.     

Stimulus control in a discrimination based on a distinctive feature

Six pigeons were instrumentally trained to discriminate between two displays that differed only by the presence of a distinctive feature on the positive or food-correlated display. In accordance with previous studies, subjects learned the discrimination and, in the presence of the positive display, directed most of their responses to the distinctive feature, although responses to the common feature were also reinforced. Subsequent generalization tests revealed that on the positive display, both common and distinctive features produced decremental gradients, contradicting Farthing's (1971) statement that the common feature acquires a control function opposite that of the distinctive feature. Procedural differences probably caused the discrepancy in results; within a display, Farthing presented common and distinctive features successively; the present study used simultaneous presentations of common and distinctive stimuli.     

Autoshaping with common and distinctive stimulus elements, compact and dispersed arrays

Four groups of pigeons were trained with a standard autoshaping procedure in which a brief fixed-duration interval always followed by a grain delivery alternated with a longer variable-duration interval never associated with grain delivery. One of two stimuli was always presented during each interval. One of them contained three black dots and a black star on a green background; the other contained four black dots on a green background. The four elements of each stimulus were arranged in a more compact array for two groups and in a more dispersed array for the other two groups. Which of the two stimuli preceded grain delivery was counterbalanced within each pair of groups. The speed of occurrence of the first autoshaped peck was not affected by whether the stimulus containing the distinctive star element preceded grain delivery, but autoshaping was faster when the stimulus arrays were compact than when they were dispersed. During 560 response-independent training trials that followed the first autoshaped peck, this pattern reversed; both discriminative control over responding and the relative frequency of pecking the stimulus that preceded grain delivery were greater for the two groups where this stimulus contained the discriminative element than for the two groups where it contained only common elements. During subsequent testing with stimuli containing only a single element each, the distinctive feature was responded to proportionately more often by the two groups for which it had been an element of the stimulus preceding grain delivery than by the two groups for which it had been an element of the stimulus complex that never was associated with grain delivery. These data add further support to the hypothesis that the initial occurrence of autoshaped responding and its subsequent maintenance are not affected by the same variables. They also suggest that automaintenance is as sensitive as response-dependent training to the presence or absence of a distinctive stimulus element among several common elements and that this sensitivity appears to be independent of the specific method used for presenting the stimuli during automaintenance.     

Visual dominance in the pigeon

In Experiment 1, three pigeons were trained to obtain grain by depressing one foot treadle in the presence of a 746-Hertz tone stimulus and by depressing a second foot treadle in the presence of a red light stimulus. Intertrial stimuli included white light and the absence of tone. The latencies to respond on auditory element trials were as fast, or faster, than on visual element trials, but pigeons always responded on the visual treadle when presented with a compound stimulus composed of the auditory and visual elements. In Experiment 2, pigeons were trained on the auditory-visual discrimination task using as trial stimuli increases in the intensity of auditory or visual intertrial stimuli. Again, pigeons showed visual dominance on subsequent compound stimulus test trials. In Experiment 3, on compound test trials, the onset of the visual stimulus was delayed relative to the onset of the auditory stimulus. Visual treadle responses generally occurred with delay intervals of less than 500 milliseconds, and auditory treadle responses generally occurred with delay intervals of greater than 500 milliseconds. The results are discussed in terms of Posner, Nissen, and Klein's (1976) theory of visual dominance in humans.     

Discrimination of polymorphous stimulus sets by pigeons

Pigeons were trained to perform a visual discrimination between stimulus sets in which the presence of any two of three positive features made a stimulus positive, while any two of three negative features made it negative (there were thus three different positive and three different negative stimuli). After training, the birds were exposed to test stimuli that contained either all three positive or all three negative features. In Experiment I three pigeons were successfully trained by a successive method, and subsequently responded to the test stimuli as though they were positive or negative respectively. In Experiment II four pigeons were trained by a simultaneous method. Three learned the discrimination and generalized appropriately to the test stimuli, but they showed no preference between positive test and positive training stimuli, nor any consistent difference in speed of response to them; and similar results were found for negative stimuli. It is argued from this that the pigeons learned to respond to the stimuli as patterns (configurations of features) rather than to the constituent features, but that they generalized to the test stimuli by using the common features. The experiments show that pigeons could in principle learn to discriminate natural polymorphous classes (such as “pigeon” or “person”) without using any single feature, but neither the present experiments nor earlier ones demonstrating discriminations of such natural classes establish that pigeons make use of polymorphous concepts in the same way as people.     

Responding to a positive stimulus by “satiated” pigeons

Skinner (1938) found that rats given discrimination training (Phase I) and then reinforced to “satiation” for responses in the presence of the negative stimulus (S?) (Phase II), began to respond again when the positive stimulus (S+) was reintroduced (Phase III). Experiment I replicated Skinner's finding with pigeons, alternating S+ and S? presentations during Phase III. In Experiment II, Phase II was extended, and Phase III results were similar to those of Experiment I, demonstrating that the recovery of S+ responding could not be attributed to a lax Phase II satiation criterion. In Experiment III, a uniform schedule of reinforcement was maintained throughout the three phases, and results similar to those of Experiment I were found, indicating that renewed S+ responding was not due to the shift in schedule between phases. In Experiment IV, Phase I consisted of discrimination training with two positive stimuli (S+_s and S+_n), and Phase II consisted of reinforcement for responses in the presence of S? and S+_s. During Phase III, significantly more responding was found to S+_s and S+_n than to S?, but no difference in responding was found between the two positive stimuli. In Experiment V, Phase I consisted of simple discrimination training, and during Phase II, responses in the presence of both S? and a novel stimulus (So) were reinforced. During Phase III, significantly more responding was found to S+ than to either S? or So, with no difference found between S? and So responding. Renewed responding to S+ during Phase III in the present experiments is best explained by behavioral contrast developed during Phase I.     

Peck tracking: a method for localizing critical features within complex pictures for pigeons

The pigeon is a standard animal in comparative psychology and is frequently used to investigate visuocognitive functions. Nonetheless, the strategies that pigeons use to discriminate complex visual stimuli remain a difficult area of study. In search of a reliable method to identify features that control the discrimination behaviour, pecking location was tracked using touch screen technology in a people-absent/people-present discrimination task. The correct stimuli contained human figures anywhere on the picture, but the birds were not required to peck on that part. However, the stimuli were designed in a way that only the human figures contained distinguishing information. All pigeons focused their pecks on a subarea of the distinctive human figures, namely the heads. Removal of the heads significantly impaired performance, while removal of other distinctive parts did not. Thus, peck tracking reveals the location within a complex visual stimulus that controls discrimination behaviour, and might be a valuable tool to reveal the strategies pigeons apply in visual discrimination tasks.     

Motion as a natural category for pigeons: Generalization and a feature-positive effect

Three groups of pigeons were trained with a modified discriminative autoshaping procedure to discriminate video images of other pigeons on the basis of movement. Birds of all groups were shown the same video images of other pigeons, which were either moving or still. The group to whom food was presented only after moving images learned the discrimination very quickly. A second group, to whom food was given only after still images, and a pseudocategory group, to whom food was presented after arbitrarily chosen stimuli, showed no evidence of discrimination during acquisition training. Extinction conditions led to clear differences in peck rates to moving and still images in the second group but not in the pseudocategory group. The result is related to the feature-positive effect. Generalization tests showed that the discrimination performance was based on visual features of the stimuli but was invariant against changes of size, perspective, brightness, and color. Furthermore, discrimination was maintained when novel images of pigeons under different viewing angles and seven other types of motion categories were presented. It is argued that the discrimination is based not on a common motion feature but on motion concepts or high-order generalization across motion categories.     

Discrimination of intentional and random motion paths by pigeons

Twelve pigeons (Columba livia) were trained on a go/no-go schedule to discriminate between two kinds of movement patterns of dots, which to human observers appear to be "intentional" and "non-intentional" movements. In experiment 1, the intentional motion stimulus contained one dot (a "wolf") that moved systematically towards another dot as though stalking it, and three distractors ("sheep"). The non-intentional motion stimulus consisted of four distractors but no stalker. Birds showed some improvement of discrimination as the sessions progressed, but high levels of discrimination were not reached. In experiment 2, the same birds were tested with different stimuli. The same parameters were used but the number of intentionally moving dots in the intentional motion stimulus was altered, so that three wolves stalked one sheep. Despite the enhanced difference of movement patterns, the birds did not show any further improvement in discrimination. However, birds for which the non-intentional stimulus was associated with reward showed a decline in discrimination. These results indicated that pigeons can discriminate between stimuli that do and do not contain an element that human observer see as moving intentionally. However, as no feature-positive effect was found in experiment 1, it is assumed that pigeons did not perceive or discriminate these stimuli on the basis that the intentional stimuli contained a feature that the non-intentional stimuli lacked, though the convergence seen in experiment 2 may have been an effective feature for the pigeons. Pigeons seem to be able to recognise some form of multiple simultaneously goal-directed motions, compared to random motions, as a distinctive feature, but do not seem to use simple "intentional" motion paths of two geometrical figures, embedded in random motions, as a feature whose presence or absence differentiates motion displays. Electronic Publication     

Transfer of a response controlling stimulus duration across discrimination problems

In the acquisition phase, pigeons learned to peck at a changeover key to shorten the duration of S? but not of S+ presented on the food key in a discrimination problem. In the transfer phase, the significance of S+ and S? was changed through extinction of both, equal reinforcement, or discrimination reversal, while the changeover key was not available. Transfer tests then showed appropriate modification of the changeover response. Similar transfer was demonstrated across orthogonal stimulus dimensions. Further analytic studies showed that this transfer of the changeover response did not depend upon mediation due to differential response rates to the food key. This research strategy enriches the study of the “second learning process” by providing an indicator of stimulus control in all phases of the procedure. Direct transfer between different problems also indicates that discriminative stimuli, although physically dissimilar, have the same “psychological value” for the subject.     

Not all same-different discriminations are created equal: Evidence contrary to a unidimensional account of same-different learning

In Experiment 1, we trained four pigeons to concurrently discriminate displays of 16 same icons (16S) from displays of 16 different icons (16D) as well as between displays of same icons (16S) from displays that contained 15 same icons and one different icon (15S:1D). The birds rapidly learned to discriminate 16S vs. 16D displays, but they failed to learn to discriminate 16S vs. 15S:1D displays. In Experiment 2, the same pigeons acquired the 16S vs. 15S:1D task after being required to locate and peck at the odd-item in the 15S:1D displays. Acquisition of the 16S vs. 15S:1D task had little effect on discriminative performance in the concurrent 16S:16D task, suggesting that a unidimensional entropy explanation for mastery of these two same-different tasks is not viable. During testing, the birds transferred discriminative performance in both tasks to displays composed of different visual stimuli. Such concurrent discrimination learning, performance, and transfer suggest that pigeons are flexible in the way they process the displays seen in these two same-different tasks.     

Failure to replicate the 'work ethic" effect in pigeons

We report six unsuccessful attempts to replicate the "work ethic" phenomenon reported by Clement, Feltus, Kaiser, and Zentall (2000). In Experiments 1-5, pigeons learned two simultaneous discriminations in which the S+ and S- stimuli were obtained by pecking an initial stimulus once or multiple (20 or 40) times. Subsequent preference tests between the S+ stimuli and between the S- stimuli mostly revealed indifference, on average, between the S+ from the multiple-peck (high-effort) trials and the S+ from the one-peck (low-effort) trials, and likewise between the two respective Sstimuli. Using a slightly different procedure that permitted assessment of the relative aversiveness of low versus high effort, Experiment 6 again revealed a pattern of indifference despite showing that pigeons took considerably longer to begin pecking on high- than on low-effort trials. Our findings call into question the reliability of the original findings and the sufficiency of the hypothesized within-trial contrast mechanism to produce them.     

Global-feature classification can be acquired more rapidly than local-feature classification in both humans and pigeons

When humans process visual stimuli, global information often takes precedence over local information. In contrast, some recent studies have pointed to a local precedence effect in both pigeons and nonhuman primates. In the experiment reported here, we compared the speed of acquisition of two different categorizations of the same four geometric figures. One categorization was on the basis of a local feature, the other on the basis of a readily apparent global feature. For both humans and pigeons, the global-feature categorization was acquired more rapidly. This result reinforces the conclusion that local information does not always take precedence over global information in nonhuman animals.     

The Effects of Feature Identity in Operant Serial Feature-Negative Discriminations

The effects of feature identity in an operant serial feature-negative discrimination (F1 T1−, T1+) were examined in two experiments with rats. In Experiment 1, rats were trained with two operant serial feature-negative discriminations in which different operants were reinforced during two auditory target cues (T1 and T2). The features (F1 and F2) were two neutral cues (visual or auditory stimuli), two motivationally significant cues (flavored sucrose solutions, also used as the operant reinforcers), or one neutral and one motivationally significant cue. Experiment 1 showed that discrimination acquisition, transfer performance, and feature–target interval testing were facilitated with a flavored sucrose feature. Experiment 2 showed that flavored sucrose-alone presentations, more than flavored sucrose trained in a pseudodiscrimination (F1 T1+, T1+), shared several similarities with a standard flavored sucrose feature. The results suggest flavored sucrose rapidly acquires inhibitory properties, which facilitates operant serial feature-negative discrimination performance.     

Social learning by following: an analysis

Learning by “following”, probably a common means by which behaviors are socially transmitted from adults to young in many species, was analyzed. Pigeons first learned to eat from a human hand. When the hand then approached an operant key and pecked it, the pigeons followed and quickly learned to do the same, thereby demonstrating social learning. When the hand only led the birds to the area of the key, without demonstrating the key-peck response, the birds learned as rapidly as with a key-peck demonstration. Birds also learned, but less reliably and more slowly, when they could observe the hand's responses but were constrained and unable to follow. “Following” was also shown to engender very rapid learning of a more complex, two-member response chain.     

The pigeon's discrimination of movement patterns (Lissajous figures) and contour-dependent rotational invariance

The ability of pigeons to discriminate complex motion patterns was investigated with the aid of moving Lissajous figures. The pigeons successfully learned to differentiate two successively presented cyclic trajectories of a single moving dot. This suggests that they can recognize a movement Gestalt when information about shape is minimal. They also quickly learned a new discrimination between moving-outline stimuli with repetitively changing contour patterns. Contrasting results were obtained when the dot or outline stimuli were axis-rotated through 90 degrees. Rotational invariance of pattern discrimination was clearly demonstrated only when moving contours were visible. Nevertheless, pigeons could discriminate the axis-orientation of a moving-dot or moving-outline pattern when trained to do so. Discrimination did not seem to depend on single parameters of motion but rather on the recognition of a temporally integrated movement Gestalt. The visual system of pigeons, as well as that of humans, may be well adapted to recognize the types of oscillatory movements that represent components of the motor behaviour shown by many living organisms.     

Food delivery as a conditional stimulus: Feature-learning and memory in pigeons

Three experiments investigated the learning and memory of discriminations based on presence versus absence of a pre-trial food delivery. In Experiment 1 half the illuminations of a response key were followed by food regardless of the subject's behavior. In one group an extra food delivery preceded only reinforced trials (feature-positive condition), whereas in a second group it preceded only nonreinforced trials (feature-negative condition). Key pecks and approaches revealed more rapid and superior discrimination learning in the first group. Experiment 2 replicated the results of Experiment 1 but yielded no evidence that greater “unexpectedness” of pretrial food conditions facilitates discriminative performance. In Experiment 3, individual pigeons trained on a conditional discrimination exhibited a within-subject feature-positive superiority. Delay between pretrial and trial stimuli interacted with feature-positive versus feature-negative training in both the between-group (Experiment 2) and within-subject (Experiment 3) procedures: performance was decremented at both short and long delays in the feature-positive condition but was decremented only at longer delays in the feature-negative condition. The feature-positive superiority obtained here is incompatible with explanations based on either the general concept of “perceptual organization” or on the conditional nature of feature-negative discriminations.     

COMPARISON OF PROTOTYPE AND ROTE INSTRUCTION OF ENGLISH NAMES FOR CHINESE VISUAL CHARACTERS

This study compared prototype and rote instruction of English names for Chinese visual characters. In the prototype condition, participants were taught the meaning of the prototype that served as the distinctive feature of multicomponent characters. In the rote condition, participants traced the character and wrote its translation. Participants learned more rapidly and maintained more words in the prototype condition.