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.     

Second-order autoshaped key pecking based on an auditory stimulus.

In Experiment 1, pigeons were exposed either to paired or to unpaired presentations of a tone and grain, and then to paired presentations of a keylight with the tone. Substantial second-order conditioned pecking to the keylight was produced in the birds that had received paired presentations of tone and grain. In Experiment 2, second-order pecking to the keylight increased in probability across four groups that had received, respectively, 20, 80, 140, or 200 paired presentations of tone and grain. In Experiment 3, the amount of pecking directed towards a keylight which predicted the first-order, tone CS was as substantial in birds without a prior history of key pecking as in birds with such a history. A further experiment failed to discover any significant differences in the levels of second-order pecking to a keylight paired with a first-order tone CS or with a first-order keylight CS. Thus, an auditory signal that does not itself support pecking may enable a localized visual stimulus to evoke key pecking.     

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.     

Elicited responding in chain schedules.

An omission procedure was employed to study elicited pecking in the first component of a two-component chain schedule. Both components were fixed-interval schedules correlated with colored keylights. The first response following the initial-link schedule produced a second fixed-interval schedule. We studied several fixed-interval lengths in two conditions: a standard response-dependent condition and an omission-contingent condition. The omission-contingent condition differed from the response-dependent condition in that responses during the initial fixed interval terminated the trial (omitting the terminal component and grain). If the terminal component was not omitted, a response following the terminal link's requirement produced 4-s access to grain. Pigeons responded during more than 70% of the initial links in the omission-contingent condition and responded during more than 90% of the initial links in the response-dependent condition. In general, rates of responding were consistent with the percentage data. The responding in the omission condition suggests that there may be elicited pecking, in chain schedules using pigeons, that is not the result of contingent conditioned reinforcement.     

Rapid acquisition of preference in concurrent chains

We report two experiments using a concurrent-chains procedure in which one terminal-link schedule was fixed-interval 8 s and the alternative schedule changed randomly from day to day. In Experiment 1, the alternative schedule varied between 4 s and 16 s according to a pseudorandom binary sequence similar to the one used by Hunter and Davison (1985). Similar to results with concurrent schedules, pigeons' response allocation in the initial link was most sensitive to the schedules arranged in the current session, although some effect of prior history was evident. Overall sensitivity was lower than for comparable data from steady-state research. In Experiment 2, a unique value between 2 s and 32 s was used for the alternative-schedule delay in each session. Sensitivity levels were similar to Experiment 1 and remained unchanged across 61 sessions of training. For all subjects, sensitivity was greater when the alternative-schedule delay was greater than 8 s compared with when it was less than 8 s. Generalized-matching plots revealed evidence of clustering of data points into two groups for some pigeons, suggesting that a process similar to a categorical discrimination may have at least partly determined response allocation. Overall, this research shows that pigeons' initial-link response allocation can adjust rapidly to frequent changes in the terminal links.     

Resurgence of temporal patterns of responding

The resurgence of temporal patterns of key pecking by pigeons was investigated in two experiments. In Experiment 1, positively accelerated and linear patterns of responding were established on one key under a discrete-trial multiple fixed-interval variable-interval schedule. Subsequently, only responses on a second key produced reinforcers according to a variable-interval schedule. When reinforcement on the second key was discontinued, positively accelerated and linear response patterns resurged on the first key, in the presence of the stimuli previously correlated with the fixed- and variable-interval schedules, respectively. In Experiment 2, resurgence was assessed after temporal patterns were directly reinforced. Initially, responding was reinforced if it approximated an algorithm-defined temporal pattern during trials. Subsequently, reinforcement depended on pausing during trials and, when it was discontinued, resurgence of previously reinforced patterns occurred for each pigeon and for 2 of 3 pigeons during a replication. The results of both experiments demonstrate the resurgence of temporally organized responding and replicate and extend previous findings on resurgence of discrete responses and spatial response sequences.     

Pigeons' preference for free choice: number of keys versus key area.

In concurrent-chains schedules, pigeons prefer terminal links that provide two keys correlated with reinforcers (free choice) over those that provide only one key (forced choice), terminal-link reinforcement rates being equal. With same-size keys, free choice provides a larger area available for pecking. Preferences were examined using terminal links that differed in key number only (one or two) or key size only (small and medium or medium and large), or that equated the area of the two free-choice keys with that of the forced-choice key. Medium (standard) keys were typically preferred to small keys, but indifference was typically obtained between medium and large keys. The size preference usually overrode free-choice preference with one medium key pitted against two small keys, but free-choice preference was reliably observed with one large key pitted against two medium keys. In other words, preferences were a joint function of key number and key area, implying that free-choice preference is not reducible to preference for larger key areas. Free-choice preference requires separate keys rather than larger areas; the relevant behavioral units are the discriminated operants correlated with each terminal-link key rather than classes defined by topographical features such as area or perimeter.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Automaintenance without stimulus-change reinforcement: Temporal control of key pecks

Yoked pairs of experimentally naive pigeons were exposed to a modified autoshaping procedure in which key pecking by the leader birds postponed both keylight termination and access to grain for the leader and the follower bird. Key pecking developed and was maintained in all birds and continued through two reversals of roles in the yoked procedure. Although temporal control developed more slowly in follower birds, asymptotic temporal distributions of key pecking were similar for all birds in both leader and follower roles; maximum responding occurred soon after keylight onset and decreased to a minimum prior to reinforcement. Response distributions for both leader and follower birds were described by Killeen's (1975) mathematical model of temporal control. Follower birds received response-independent reinforcement, and the development by these birds of temporal distributions which are minimal immediately prior to reinforcement is without precedent in Pavlovian appetitive conditioning. However, maintenance of key pecking by the leader birds, whose responses postponed both stimulus-change and food reinforcement, supports an interpretation of autoshaped and automaintained key pecking as responding elicited by signaled grain presentation.     

Competition between stimulus-reinforcer contingencies and anticipatory contrast.

Procedures used to study anticipatory contrast are conceptually similar to those used to study autoshaping, in that two target stimuli signal either higher or lower rates of reinforcement in the following components of the schedule. Despite this signal contingency, anticipatory contrast entails response rates that are higher to the target stimulus followed by the lower rate of reinforcement. To determine the relation between such effects and autoshaping, different variations of the procedure were used in which the signal contingency was presented in the absence of reinforcement in the target components themselves and in which the reinforcement schedules in the different following components were signaled by the same stimulus. Autoshaping effects of this signal contingency were demonstrated when no reinforcement was available during the target-component signals themselves. Intermediate patterns of behavior occurred when reinforcement was available during the target-component signals and when their different following schedules were correlated with the same stimulus. Attempts to isolate these signal and contrast effects functionally by using the signal-key procedure were unsuccessful. The results demonstrate that Pavlovian stimulus contingencies are in competition with the dynamics of anticipatory contrast, thus reducing its occurrence under some circumstances.     

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.     

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.     

Arousal, changeover responses, and preference in concurrent schedules

Pigeons were trained on multiple schedules that provided concurrent reinforcement in each of two components. In Experiment 1, one component consisted of a variable-interval (VI) 40-s schedule presented with a VI 20-s schedule, and the other a VI 40-s schedule presented with a VI 80-s schedule. After extended training, probe tests measured preference between the stimuli associated with the two 40-s schedules. Probe tests replicated the results of Belke (1992) that showed preference for the 40-s schedule that had been paired with the 80-s schedule. In a second condition, the overall reinforcer rate provided by the two components was equated by adding a signaled VI schedule to the component with the lower reinforcer rate. Probe results were unchanged. In Experiment 2, pigeons were trained on alternating concurrent VI 30-s VI 60-s schedules. One schedule provided 2-s access to food and the other provided 6-s access. The larger reinforcer magnitude produced higher response rates and was preferred on probe trials. Rate of changeover responding, however, did not differ as a function of reinforcer magnitude. The present results demonstrate that preference on probe trials is not a simple reflection of the pattern of changeover behavior established during training.     

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.     

Procrastination by pigeons: preference for larger, more delayed work requirements.

In three experiments, pigeons chose between alternatives that required the completion of a small ratio schedule early in the trial or a larger ratio schedule later in the trial. Completion of the ratio requirement did not lead to an immediate reinforcer, but simply allowed the events of the trial to continue. In Experiment 1, the ratio requirements interrupted periods in which food was delivered on a variable-time schedule. In Experiments 2 and 3, each ratio requirement was preceded and followed by a delay, and only one reinforcer was delivered, at the end of each trial. Two of the experiments used an adjusting-ratio procedure in which the ratio requirement was increased and decreased over trials so as to estimate an indifference point--a ratio size at which the two alternatives were chosen about equally often. These experiments found clear evidence for "procrastination"--the choice of a larger but more delayed response requirement. In some cases, subjects chose the more delayed ratio schedule even when it was larger than the more immediate alternative by a factor of four or more. The results suggest that as the delay to the start of a ratio requirement is increased, it has progressively less effect on choice behavior, in much the same way that delaying a positive reinforcer reduces it effect on choice.     

Punishment of autoshaped key-peck responses of pigeons

The effects of different voltages of response-dependent and response-independent electric shock on the frequency of key-peck responses engendered by an autoshaping procedure were studied. In Experiments I and II, each response produced a brief electric shock, and response frequency generally decreased more with higher-voltage shock. Preshock frequencies of responding were generally recovered across successive sessions of relatively low-voltage shock delivery but not at higher shock voltages. The effects of response-dependent and response-independent shock were compared in Experiment III by using a yoked-control procedure in which each pigeon received each type of shock delivery at different times. Response-dependent shock generally produced greater decreases in response frequency. In the final experiment, one response-independent shock per autoshaping trial was scheduled. The number of autoshaped responses per trial was related to shock voltages. These results suggest that response-dependent and response-independent electric shock effectively decrease frequency of autoshaped responses.     

Choice behavior in transition: development of preference for the higher probability of reinforcement.

Ten acquisition curves were obtained from each of 4 pigeons in a two-choice discrete-trial procedure. In each of these 10 conditions, the two response keys initially had equal probabilities of reinforcement, and subjects' choice responses were about equally divided between the two keys. Then the reinforcement probabilities were changed so that one key had a higher probability of reinforcement (the left key in half of the conditions and the right key in the other half), and in nearly every case the subjects developed a preference for this key. The rate of acquisition of preference for this key was faster when the ratio of the two reinforcement probabilities was higher. For instance, acquisition of preference was faster in conditions with reinforcement probabilities of .12 and .02 than in conditions with reinforcement probabilities of .40 and .30, even though the pairs of probabilities differed by .10 in both cases. These results were used to evaluate the predictions of some theories of transitional behavior in choice situations. A trial-by-trial analysis of individual responses and reinforcers suggested that reinforcement had both short-term and long-term effects on choice. The short-term effect was an increased probability of returning to the same key on the one or two trials following a reinforcer. The long-term effect was a gradual increase in the proportion of responses on the key with the higher probability of reinforcement, an increase that usually continued for several hundred trials.     

Auditory stimulus control in pigeons: Jenkins and Harrison (1960) revisited

Pigeons were trained to peck a key in the presence of a 1000-Hz tone on a variable-interval one-minute schedule of reinforcement. One group was trained with an illuminated key; the other was trained in a totally dark chamber. During a generalization test on tonal frequency, subjects trained and tested with the key illuminated produced rather shallow gradients around the training value; subjects trained and tested in the dark produced steeper generalization gradients. These data replicate Jenkins and Harrison's (1960) finding that tone acquires relatively little control over responding and demonstrate that this absence of control is a function of the presence of the keylight.