Extinction-induced aggression

Pigeons were conditioned to peck a response key under a procedure that alternated periods of food reinforcement with periods of extinction. The pigeons attacked a nearby pigeon at the onset of extinction. Some also attacked a stuffed model of a pigeon. The duration of attack was an inverse function of the time since the last food reinforcement and a direct function of the number of reinforcements. The pigeons attacked after the last food delivery whether or not the conditioned pecking response was required and whether or not the extinction period was signaled. The food had to be eaten; the mere sight and sound of food being delivered did not produce attack. Prior satiation reduced attack. The phenomenon was not attributable to a past history of competition between pigeons since socially deprived pigeons also attacked. Superstitious reinforcement of attack was not found to be a factor. The results indicated that the transition from food reinforcement to extinction was an aversive event that produced aggression.     

Absence of shock-elicited aggression in pigeons

Two pigeons that attacked a taxidermically prepared target pigeon during a schedule of positive reinforcement for key pecking, and two that did not, were shocked through implanted electrodes in the presence of the target. Shock intensities of 2 and 4 mA, durations of 0.1 and 1.3 sec, and frequencies of 2, 6, 20, and 35 per minute were delivered across 16 sessions with 180 shocks per session. No pigeon attacked the target; one pecked the shockplug on its back. The two pigeons that had not attacked during the positive reinforcement schedules were conditioned to peck the target for food reinforcement before another 16 sessions of shock. No attack was observed in these shock sessions. During subsequent positive reinforcement of key pecking, the target was attacked by the two pigeons that had originally attacked and by one that had not. Absence of shock-elicited attack in these pigeons may be related to the parameters of the experiment or may be yet another instance of the absence of shock-elicited attack in the class Aves. At least under the present conditions, it was not possible to predict the level of attack during electric shock from the level of attack during schedules of positive reinforcement for key pecking.     

Negatively reinforced key pecking

A reinforcement-switching procedure was used to produce negatively reinforced key pecking in pigeons. First, key pecking on a chain schedule (fixed-interval 10-sec variable-interval 60-sec) was conditioned using grain reinforcement. Second, intermittent shock in the initial link was introduced at a low intensity and gradually increased. Third, food reinforcement in the terminal link was eliminated. With shock at 90 V occurring on the average every 3 sec, initial-link pecking was maintained with no terminal-link food. Three of four pigeons responded consistently at shock intensities of 90, 70, and 50 V but not at 30 V. A fourth pigeon responded at but not below 90 V. Rate of response was directly related to shock frequency. Eliminating food deprivation did not affect the negatively reinforced performance.     

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.     

Inhibitory conditioning resulting from a reduction in the magnitude of reinforcement

Five experiments, all employing conditioned suppression in rats, studied inhibitory conditioning to a stimulus signalling a reduction in shock intensity. Experimental subjects were conditioned to a tone signalling a 1·0 mA shock and to a tone-light compound signalling a 0·4 mA shock. On a summation test in which it alleviated the suppression maintained by a third stimulus also associated with the 1·0 mA shock, the light was established as a conditioned inhibitor. Retardation tests gave ambiguous results: the light was relatively slow to condition when paired, either alone or in conjunction with another stimulus, with the 0·4 mA shock, but the difference from a novel stimulus control group was not significant. Two final experiments found no evidence at all of inhibition on a summation test in which the light was presented in conjunction with a stimulus that had itself been associated with the 0·4 mA shock. The results of these experiments have implications for the question of what animals learn during the course of inhibitory conditioning.     

Some notes on conditioned suppression and reinforcement schedules

Two pigeons were trained on an FR 150 schedule of reinforcement. An Estes-Skinner conditioned suppression procedure was then superimposed on this performance at varied intervals. If the CS occurred during the early stages of the ratio run, complete suppression resulted. If the CS occurred during the later stages of the run, the birds continued to respond until the reinforcement was obtained, which was then followed by complete suppression.     

Constraints on Pavlovian conditioning of the pigeon: Relative conditioned reinforcing effects of red-light and tone CSs paired with food

Recent Pavlovian conditioning experiments presented all possible CS-US combinations of red-light and tone CSs and food and shock USs to separate groups of pigeons. Pigeons receiving shock USs demonstrated conditioned head raising followed by prancing to both CSs, but CRs were acquired more rapidly to tone than to red light. Although pigeons receiving food USs rapidly acquired a conditioned response of pecking to the red-light CS, there was no evidence of conditioned responding in groups receiving tone-food pairings. This outcome left open the possibility that Pavlovian pairings of tone and food may have resulted in association formation that was not revealed in performance. The present series of experiments attempted to reveal that association, using an indirect method of assessment, conditioned reinforcement. Experiment 1 demonstrated that both red light and tone paired with food became positive conditioned reinforcers, suggesting that an association between tone and food was formed in the same number of Pavlovian conditioning trials that previously failed to yield any direct evidence of conditioning. Experiment 2, which presented fewer conditioning trials, revealed that the tone-food association was formed less rapidly than the red light-food association. Experiment 3 demonstrated that the observed outcomes were not attributable to unconditioned, rather than conditioned, reinforcing effects of the Css.     

Social facilitation of responses during a stimulus paired with electric shock

Key-pecking responses of a pigeon were maintained by a variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement. The responses were suppressed during the occasional presentation of a warning stimulus paired with electric shock. The presence of a second pigeon emitting the same response for food reinforcement reduced the suppression that otherwise occurred during the warning stimulus when the second pigeon was absent. These results reveal that the social facilitation phenomenon can be used to restore behavior that is suppressed by a conditioned aversive stimulus.     

Preference for locus of punishment in a response sequence

Food-deprived pigeons pecked a key under a schedule in which grain was made available after the seventieth peck. In each sequence of 70 responses, either the first, middle, or final response was followed by electric shock. Before the first response of each sequence, each response on a second key changed the color of the food key and the schedule of shock that was correlated with the food key color. Each pigeon preferred a schedule of shock, in that each of the three shock schedules did not occur equally often. The preferred shock schedule and the strength of the preference varied among the pigeons. The overall rate of responding by a pigeon under a given shock schedule was directly related to the pigeon's relative preference for that schedule, except when shock after the first response in the sequence was the most preferred schedule.     

Transfer of conditioned inhibition across different aversive reinforcers in the rat

Three experiments using a conditioned suppression procedure in rats assessed transfer of conditioned inhibition across different aversive reinforcers. Experiment 1, using shock and car horn blast as reinforcers, showed that a noise negatively correlated with 0.7-mA shock between sessions attenuated suppression of lever pressing elicited by the signals for 0.7-mA shock and 110-db horn blast. Similarly, when the noise signaled the omission of horn blast, it attenuated suppression elicited by the signals for horn blast and shock. Experiment 2, using the same procedure, replicated transfer of conditioned inhibition from shock to horn found in Experiment 1, and indicated that such effects should be attributed to associative factors. Experiment 3, using the conditioned inhibition paradigm and different chambers during training and testing, replicated transfer from horn to shock and indicated that transfer cannot be attributed to multiple-background-reinforcer associations established during inhibitory training. The results of these experiments have implications for theories of conditioned inhibition.     

A change of context can enhance performance of an aversive but not of an appetitive conditioned response

In four experiments rats received pairings of one auditory CS and mild shock in one context and of a second auditory CS and shock in a second context. When tested with one of these CSs in the context in which it had never been experienced, they consistently showed enhanced levels of suppression. In one of these experiments, suppression was measured over 15-sec intervals throughout a 90-sec long CS. A change of context resulted in an increased level of suppression at all points throughout the CS, a finding which does not encourage the belief that it was due to an increase in unconditioned suppression at the onset of the CS. Another experiment provided equally little support for an alternative account in terms of increased arousal. The results therefore suggest that a change of context can increase the level of conditioned suppression elicited by a CS paired with mild shock. Two final experiments employing the same CSs and contexts, however, found no evidence that a change of context had any effect at all on the performance of an appetitively conditioned response.     

Are associative changes in acquisition and extinction negatively accelerated?

Performance to a conditioned stimulus typically shows a negatively accelerated change with Pavlovian conditioning or extinction. This is commonly attributed to negatively accelerated changes in the underlying associative learning. However, the absence of well-specified rules for mapping learning into performance makes it difficult to infer changes in the size of associative changes for stimuli occupying different points on the performance scale. This problem can be addressed by comparing responding to stimulus compounds each consisting of 2 stimuli, 1 of which is poorly conditioned and 1 of which is well conditioned, when either the former or the latter receives a specified amount of additional training. This permits comparison at a common performance level. Two magazine-approach experiments in rats and 2 autoshaping experiments in pigeons used this technique to assess the form of the associative changes in acquisition and extinction.     

Stimulus aspects of aversive controls: long term effects of suppression procedures

Five years ago, pigeons trained to peck a key for food were periodically presented with a 1000 cps tone which ended with electrical shock. They were then tested for the stimulus generalization of conditioned suppression. After an interruption of 2.5 yr, another series of generalization tests showed no loss of suppression. The present study was conducted 1.5 yr later to retest the effect of an extended interruption on retention of suppression. It was found, again, that suppression did not decline over time. The present paper, which summarizes the earlier data and reports the most recent findings, provides an overview of the extended behavioral consequences of the original aversive procedures administered five years ago.     

The effects of electroconvulsive shock on the action of a reinforcing stimulus

Three experiments sought to evaluate the effect of electroconvulsive shock on the action of a reinforcing stimulus. In all experiments behavior was maintained on a 2 min variable interval schedule for food reinforcement. Foot shock at the termination of a buzzer stimulus served as the reinforcing stimulus for conditioned suppression during the ensuing buzzer interval. Omission of foot shock at the termination of the buzzer stimulus was followed by normal responding (no conditioned suppression) during the next buzzer interval. In Exp I electroconvulsive shock followed foot shock at varying time intervals. In the first subsidiary experiment electroconvulsive shock followed an unreinforced buzzer stimulus at varying time intervals. In the second subsidiary experiment electroconvulsive shock followed foot shock at varying time intervals and an additional buzzer stimulus was sounded between the termination of foot shock and the onset of electroconvulsive shock. These three experiments demonstrated that electroconvulsive shock invariably abolished the effects of the reinforcing stimulus if it followed conditioning by no more than 10.0 sec and never had an effect if it followed conditioning by 12.5 sec or more; electroconvulsive shock was not acting as a reinforcing stimulus in this situation.     

A conditioned reinforcer maintained by temporal association with the termination of shock

Two experiments were conducted to determine whether a stimulus can be established as a positive conditioned reinforcer by associating it with the termination of shock, but without training the animal to make any response in its presence. In the first, six rats were conditioned to press a bar to terminate shock on a variable ratio schedule; white noise was then substituted as the immediate consequence, with the shock terminating 30 sec after the last press in its presence. It was found that the rate of pressing in the absence of noise depended on the contingency between the pressing and the noise. The second experiment sought to determine whether the difference in rates before and after the onset of the noise was due to the reinforcement of prior responding by the onset of the noise or to the suppression of subsequent responding by differential reinforcement of competing behavior. Six more rats were trained in the same manner, but with shock terminating 30 sec after the onset of the noise, regardless of what the animal did in its presence. Again the rate was higher before the onset of the noise, indicating that pressing was indeed maintained by the noise as a conditioned reinforcer.     

"Automaintenance": the role of reinforcement

A key was illuminated on the average of every 30 sec for a duration of 6 sec and this was followed by food presentations. When key pecks in the presence of the light produced immediate access to grain (autoshaping procedure) pigeons were likely to peck. When pecks terminated the keylight but prevented access to grain (automaintenance procedure) pigeons were much less likely to peck. Seven of 12 pigeons failed to develop responding during the automaintenance procedure. Four of the five pigeons that responded during the automaintenance procedure were exposed to a procedure in which responses could not immediately terminate the light. Three of the four ceased to respond during optimal automaintenance conditions, suggesting that the response-dependent offset of the keylight had been reinforcing their pecking. Responding during the automaintenance procedure was eliminated for a fifth pigeon by eliminating the contiguity of light-offset and food-onset on those trials in which the pigeon did not peck. These results suggest that: (1) automaintenance (unlike autoshaping) is not an effective procedure for reliably generating responding; (2) responding that does occur during the automaintenance procedure is reinforced by the response-dependent offset of the keylight.     

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.     

Complex conditional control by pigeons in a continuous virtual environment

We tested two pigeons in a continuously streaming digital environment. Using animation software that constantly presented a dynamic, three‐dimensional (3D) environment, the animals were tested with a conditional object identification task. The correct object at a given time depended on the virtual context currently streaming in front of the pigeon. Pigeons were required to accurately peck correct target objects in the environment for food reward, while suppressing any pecks to intermixed distractor objects which delayed the next object's presentation. Experiment 1 established that the pigeons’ discrimination of two objects could be controlled by the surface material of the digital terrain. Experiment 2 established that the pigeons’ discrimination of four objects could be conjunctively controlled by both the surface material and topography of the streaming environment. These experiments indicate that pigeons can simultaneously process and use at least two context cues from a streaming environment to control their identification behavior of passing objects. These results add to the promise of testing interactive digital environments with animals to advance our understanding of cognition and behavior.     

Imitation of conditional discriminations in pigeons (Columba livia)

In the present experiments, the 2-action method was used to determine whether pigeons could learn to imitate a conditional discrimination. Demonstrator pigeons (Columba livia) stepped on a treadle in the presence of 1 light and pecked at the treadle in the presence of another light. Demonstration did not seem to affect acquisition of the conditional discrimination (Experiment 1) but did facilitate its reversal of the conditional discrimination (Experiments 2 and 3). The results suggest that pigeons are not only able to learn a specific behavior by observing another pigeon, but they can also learn under which circumstances to perform that behavior. The results have implications for proposed mechanisms of imitation in animals.     

SOME RELATIONS BETWEEN CLASSICALLY CONDITIONED AGGRESSION AND CONDITIONED SUPPRESSION IN SQUIRREL MONKEYS

During three experiments with squirrel monkeys, stimulus and shock pairings were given in the presence of a bite tube. Experiments 1 and 2 used a conditioned-suppression procedure in which bar pressing was reinforced with food. A transparent shield prevented biting of the bar. When the stimulus was paired with shock, bar pressing decreased (conditioned suppression) and tube biting increased during the stimulus (classically conditioned aggression). When the bite tube was removed on alternate sessions in Experiment 2, there was more suppression when the tube was present, thus suggesting that biting competed with bar pressing. However, this simple competing-response interpretation was complicated by the findings of Experiment 3 where, with naive monkeys, bar pressing was never reinforced with food, yet bar pressing was induced during the stimulus and was highest when the bite tube was absent. The fact that stimulus-induced bar pressing developed indicates that bar pressing in conditioned-suppression procedures, suppressed or not, may be maintained by two types of control—the food reinforcer and induced CS control. The higher rate of induced bar pressing during the stimulus with the bite tube absent confounds a simple competing response interpretation of conditioned suppression. It suggests that shock-induced responses during conditioned suppression could be both contributing to and competing with responding maintained by food, with the net effect depending on specific but ill-defined features of the situation.