Correspondence as conditional stimulus control: insights from experiments with pigeons.

Correspondence between saying and doing, typically studied in young children and individuals with developmental disabilities, was examined as an instance of conditional stimulus control. In Experiment 1, 3 pigeons were exposed to a two‐component repeated‐trials procedure. In the first—sample or say—component, two response keys transilluminated by different colored lights were presented and the pigeon pecked one of the keys. After 1 s of darkness in the chamber, the second—choice or do—component was presented, in which the two keys again were transilluminated, one by the color selected in the first component and the second by another color. Selecting the color that matched that selected in the say component resulted in access to food. Selecting the other color produced a blackout of the chamber. After an intertrial interval (ITI), the next say component was programmed, and the procedure was repeated. Correspondence remained at chance levels through several manipulations of ITI duration and sample response requirement. When a correction procedure was added such that only the originally selected sample stimulus was re‐presented until a correct choice response occurred, reliable correspondence developed in 2 pigeons. This correspondence was eliminated by making reinforcement independent of correspondence and subsequently was reestablished when reinforcement again depended on correspondence. In Experiment 2, 3 other pigeons rapidly acquired correspondence under the final procedure used in Experiment 1. Increasing the time interval between the say and do components diminished correspondence. The results of the two experiments suggest how correspondence may be considered an instance of conditional stimulus control and that it is possible to construct a homologue of human say‐do correspondence with pigeons.     

Color preference in pigeons: stimulus intensity and reinforcement contingency effects in the avoidance of blue stimuli.

In a procedure intended to determine color preference in pigeons (which partially replicated Catania, Owens, & von Lossberg, 1983), two keys were illuminated by different colors drawn from a set of amber, red, green, or blue stimuli; this was followed by the presentation of grain when either of the two colors was pecked. The grain was illuminated alternately across trials with the colors presented on the keys. In Experiment 1 the intensity of the color stimuli used was not equalized, whereas in Experiment 2 the intensity of the colors was equalized. The low preference for blue found in Experiment 1, as measured by differential key pecking, was not found in Experiment 2. The discriminability of the intensity-equalized colors was confirmed in Experiment 2a, in which equal-intensity color discrimination problems were presented. In Experiment 3, as in Catania et al. (1983), a response-independent reinforcement schedule was used, but with intensity-equalized colors. In contrast to Experiment 2, very low preference for blue was found here and in Experiment 4, which used a within-subject procedure. These findings suggest that pigeon color preference may be a function of intensity, but all controlling variables have not as yet been identified.     

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.     

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.     

Divided stimulus control: a replication and a quantitative model

Four pigeons were trained on a conditional discrimination. The conditional stimuli were compounds of pairs of stimuli from two different dimensions, fast versus slow cycles of red or green stimuli, and short- versus long-duration presentations of these cycles. Across conditions, the probability of reinforcers for correctly responding to each dimension was varied from 0 to 1. Discriminability, measured by log d, for stimuli on a dimension increased as the relative frequency of reinforcers for that dimension increased, replicating the results of Shahan and Podlesnik (2006). Two further conditions showed that discriminability between stimuli on each dimension was unaffected by whether the stimuli on the other dimension varied or were constant. Finally, maximal discriminability was unchanged in a redundant-relevant cues condition in which either of the stimuli comprising a compound signaled the same correct response. Davison and Nevin's (1999) model provided an excellent quantitative account of the effect of relative reinforcer frequency on discriminability, and thus of the way in which divided stimulus control is itself controlled by relative reinforcement.     

Response summation to a compound stimulus in a context of choice

Key pecks by two groups of pigeons were reinforced on concurrent schedules. For group Ē, pecks were reinforced during either a visual or an auditory stimulus; for group E, an additional, extinction component was available, during which both visual and auditory stimuli were absent. After training, both groups were given a compound test to measure preference among four stimuli, the three used in training plus a compound of the visual and auditory stimulus. Group E showed preference for the compound, emitting more pecks and spending more time in this stimulus than in other stimuli. Group Ē showed no preference between the compound and visual stimulus, nor between the auditory stimulus and the absence of both stimuli, but preferred the former pair over the latter pair of stimuli.     

Symmetry and transitivity of conditional relations in monkeys (Cebus apella) and pigeons (Columba livia)

In Experiment 1 six monkeys were tested with discriminative relations that were backward relative to their training in a 0-second conditional (“symbolic”) matching procedure. Although there was some indication of backward associations, the evidence was generally weak, and statistical evaluations did not reach conventional significance levels. Unlike children, who show backward associations to the point of symmetry, monkeys and pigeons display at best only weak and transient backward associations. In Experiment 2 associative transitivity was assessed across two sets of conditional matching tasks. All four monkeys tested demonstrated strong transitivity. In contrast, in Experiment 3 there was no evidence of transitivity in three pigeons tested under conditions closely comparable to those of Experiment 2. These results may identify some key features of interspecies differences and contribute to analyses of serial learning in animals.     

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.     

Stimulus control topographies and tests of symmetry in pigeons

Pigeons were tested for symmetry after A-B training under conditions designed to avoid problems that may prevent its emergence, namely the change of stimulus location in testing relative to training and the lack of requisite discrimination training. In Experiment 1, samples appeared in two locations during baseline training to minimize the impact of stimulus location. Experiments 2 and 3 included multiple-location training along with additional identity and symbolic matching training, respectively, to explicitly train all of the simultaneous and successive stimulus discriminations required for testing. Experiment 4 provided reinforcement for symmetrical matching relations with some stimulus sets (with multiple-location training) prior to symmetry testing with different sets. In all experiments, pigeons showed no evidence of symmetry despite the fact that baseline (A-B) matching transferred to novel locations. Additional tests for reflexivity (Experiment 2) yielded similar outcomes. These results indicate that the change in stimulus location is not the sole reason that pigeons do not show symmetry and increase the plausibility of arguments that symmetry and other indexes of stimulus equivalence may be beyond the capabilities of the pigeon.     

Melioration revisited: a systematic replication of Vaughan (1981)

Organisms that behave so as to forfeit a relatively higher overall rate of reinforcement in favor of a relatively lower rate are said to engage in suboptimal choice. Suboptimal choice has been linked with maladaptive behavior in humans. Melioration theory offers one explanatory framework for suboptimal choice. Melioration theory suggests behavior is controlled by differences in local reinforcer rates between alternatives. Vaughan (1981) arranged two experimental conditions in which maximizing the overall rate of reinforcement required behavior that was compatible, or incompatible, with melioration. Vaughan found pigeons allocated more time to a locally richer alternative even when doing so resulted in suboptimal choice. However, Vaughan did not show whether these effects could systematically reverse and did not provide within‐session data to show that choice across short time spans remains under the control of differences in local reinforcer rates. The present study used pigeons to replicate and extend Vaughan's findings. We investigated shifts in overall‐ and within‐session choice across repeated conditions, according to arranged local contingencies. Behavior systematically followed changes in local contingencies for most pigeons. Within‐session data suggests that, providing differences in local reinforcer rates are discriminated, pigeons will allocate more time to a locally richer alternative, even if this leads to suboptimal choice. These findings facilitate the more confident use of similar procedures that investigate how melioration contributes to suboptimal choice.     

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.     

The interaction of stimulus and reinforcer control in complex temporal discrimination.

Six pigeons were trained in a discrete-trials signal-detection procedure to discriminate between a fixed-duration stimulus (5 s or 20 s) and a set of variable durations ranging from 2.5 s to 57.5 s in steps of 5 s. For each fixed-duration stimulus, the ratio of reinforcer frequencies contingent upon reporting the fixed versus the variable stimulus was systematically manipulated. Detection performance was well controlled by both the stimulus value and the reinforcer ratio. Both the discriminability between the fixed duration and the set of variable durations, and the discriminability between the fixed duration and each of the variable durations, were independent of the reinforcer-frequency ratio when discriminability was measured as log d. The sensitivity of response bias to reinforcement-ratio changes was independent of the value of the fixed duration, but was not independent of the discriminability of the variable durations from the fixed durations. Under current models, discriminability measures in complex temporal discrimination may be independent of biasing manipulations, but bias measures are not independent of stimulus values.     

Discrete and continuous measures of dimensional stimulus control

In two sets of experiments, we examined dimensional stimulus control of pigeons' responses to a visual flicker-rate continuum. In the first experiment, responses to a single key were reinforced periodically during stimuli from one half of the stimulus continuum, and responses during other stimuli were extinguished. In the second experiment, two response keys were simultaneously available, with reinforcement for each response alternative associated with different halves of the stimulus continuum. Conditions of the second experiment involved either free-operant or discrete-trial stimulus presentations. Results from these experiments show that positive dimensional contrast appeared in discrimination tasks with one or two response alternatives, but only with free-operant procedures. In addition, discrimination between stimulus classes established by differential reinforcement was assessed as accurately by continuous rate measures as by discrete response choice in the two-alternative situation. The general implication of these experiments is that response rate measures, when properly applied, may reveal sources of variation within stimulus classes, such as dimensional contrast, that are not evident with discrete measures.     

Removal of an obstacle: Problem-solving behavior in pigeons

The importance of a subject's personal history in the solution of an obstruction problem was demonstrated with pigeons. Four birds were trained to peck a key located outside the chamber by poking their heads through an opening in a screen. During tests, a white block was placed in front of the opening, so that it was not possible to peck the key without removing the block. All birds failed to remove the block. However, all birds that were subsequently trained to push the white block around the chamber in the absence of the key and a few of the birds trained similarly but with a black block solved the problem by pushing the block aside and pecking the key. One bird showed the abrupt descent in the learning curve that has been considered a characteristic of “insightful” problem solving. All birds maintained their successful performance after a 1-month interval with no intervening tests.     

Delayed choice responding by pigeons when the correct response is not predictable from the sample stimulus.

Food-deprived pigeons were presented with a row of four response keys situated above a grain hopper aperture. At the start of a trial, three of four keys were randomly selected and illuminated white for six seconds. After a variable blackout period, one of the three previously white keys and the previously dark key were illuminated green, and the remaining white keys were reilluminated as before. A response to the green key that was previously white was reinforced with three-second access to gain, a response to any other key resulted in a three-second blackout and the start of a new trial. Five of six subjects responded to the correct green key more often than chance at an interstimulus interval of 1.5 seconds, and they displayed maximal performance at different intertrial interval values ranging from 15 to 60 seconds. Choice accuracy decreased for all but one subject as the interstimulus interval was increased. For the range of interstimulus interval durations employed, decrements in choice accuracy were qualitatively similar to, but lower than those typically obtained from, delayed-matching-to-sample or delayed-pair comparison procedures.     

Nonstable concurrent choice in pigeons

Six pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval schedules in which the arranged reinforcer ratios changed from session to session according to a 31-step pseudorandom binary sequence. This procedure allows a quantitative analysis of the degree to which performance in an experimental session is affected by conditions in previous sessions. Two experiments were carried out. In each, the size of the reinforcer ratios arranged between the two concurrent schedules was varied between 31-step conditions. In Experiment 1, the concurrent schedules were arranged independently, and in Experiment 2 they were arranged nonindependently. An extended form of the generalized matching law described the relative contribution of past and present events to present-session behavior. Total performance in sessions was mostly determined by the reinforcer ratio in that session and partially by reinforcers that had been obtained in previous sessions. However, the initial exposure to the random sequence produced a lower sensitivity to current-session reinforcers but no difference in overall sensitivity to reinforcement. There was no evidence that the size of the reinforcer ratios available on the concurrent schedules affected either overall sensitivity to reinforcement or the sensitivity to reinforcement in the current session. There was also no evidence of any different performance between independent and nonindependent scheduling. Because of these invariances, this experiment validates the use of the pseudorandom sequence for the fast determination of sensitivity to reinforcement.     

Conditioning of within-trial patterns of key pecking in pigeons

The possibility of conditioning systematic patterns of responding during brief discrete trials was studied by requiring hungry pigeons to key peck and then pause or to pause and then key peck in order to gain access to food. These schedules were highly effective in promoting decelerated and accelerated rates of responding, respectively, within individual trials; indeed, performance was quite similar to that observed when explicit external stimuli were correlated with “peck” and “pause” portions of the daily trials. Finally, schedules of reinforcement that did not selectively reinforce peck-pause or pause-peck patterns neither generated these patterns nor maintained them at the previous high levels. The results, therefore, confirm Shimp's (1976) proposal that organized groupings of discrete responses may function as operants—even in the absence of strict response-reinforcer contiguity.     

Reproduction memory of two-event sequences in pigeons

Six pigeons were trained to reproduce two-event sequences in an experiment that employed a discrete-trial procedure that required subjects to peck one of four possible sample sequences (left-left, left-right, right-right, right-left) signaled on a given trial by the successive illumination of response keys. Following a retention interval (0.1 to 30 seconds), a reinforcer was delivered if a subject reproduced the prior sample sequence during a test condition in which both left and right keys were illuminated. The pigeons readily reproduced the orders in which they had just seen and pecked two illuminated keys. Reproduction accuracy declined as the retention interval was increased. Homogeneous sequences (left-left, right-right) were reproduced with greater accuracy than heterogeneous sequences.     

Transfer of oddity-from-sample performance in pigeons

Four pigeons were trained on a modified three-key oddity-from-sample task in which an observing response to the sample (center-key) stimulus lighted a single comparison (side-key) stimulus. If the comparison stimulus was different from the sample stimulus, a single peck to the lighted comparison was reinforced. If the comparison and sample stimuli were identical, the pigeons had to refrain from pecking the comparison for 4.6 seconds to terminate the matching comparison and to produce immediately a nonmatching comparison on the remaining side key. Each peck to the matching comparison reset the 4.6-second delay interval. Three hues were used during acquisition. During tests for transfer of the oddity performance, two novel hues were substituted either individually or together for one or two of the original training hues. For three birds, latencies to novel nonmatching hues were identical to baseline nonmatching latencies. Latencies to novel matching hues were shorter than baseline matching latencies but were consistently longer than novel nonmatching latencies. These transfer data demonstrate that the pigeons learned the oddity concept.     

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.