Acquisition of the autoshaped key peck as a function of amount of preliminary magazine training

Three experiments evaluated the effect of magazine training on acquisition of the pigeon's key peck during autoshaping. In Experiment I, pigeons were exposed to two days of extended magazine training, followed on the third day by keylight-only presentations. All pigeons pecked the keylight early in the keylight-only session. Experiment II examined the relationship between the number of magazine-training trials and trials to the first peck. Pigeons were given either 0, 3, 10, or 25 magazine-training trials followed by the standard autoshaping procedure. The number of trials to the first peck was related to the number of magazine-training trials. In Experiment III, pigeons were exposed to the standard autoshaping procedure without prior magazine training. The data from Experiment III suggested that key pecking will occur only after the response of eating from the lighted hopper has occurred. Taken together, these results suggest that initial magazine training is an important variable in autoshaping. Key pecking is discussed as a generalized consummatory response.     

Autoshaping as a function of prior food presentations

Young chickens were given 1, 10, 100, or 1000 presentations of grain in a hopper. Subsequently, the key was illuminated before each presentation of grain to study autoshaping of the key-peck response. The number of keylight-grain pairings before a bird first pecked the lighted key was found to be a U-shaped function of the number of prior food-only presentations, with pecks occurring significantly sooner after 100 food-only trials than after any of the other values. Two of five chicks at the 100-trial value pecked on the first illumination of the key. Experiment II showed further that when a series of food-only trials (no keylight) preceded keylight-only trials (no food) 30% of the chicks pecked the illuminated key. Experiment III extended the generality of first-trial pecking to pigeons. After preliminary training with food-only, two of five pigeons pecked on the first illumination of a key. The results suggest a close relationship between autoshaping and pseudo-conditioning.     

Mechanisms underlying the effects of unsignaled delayed reinforcement on key pecking of pigeons under variable-interval schedules.

Three experiments were conducted to test an interpretation of the response-rate-reducing effects of unsignaled nonresetting delays to reinforcement in pigeons. According to this interpretation, rates of key pecking decrease under these conditions because key pecks alternate with hopper-observing behavior. In Experiment 1, 4 pigeons pecked a food key that raised the hopper provided that pecks on a different variable-interval-schedule key met the requirements of a variable-interval 60-s schedule. The stimuli associated with the availability of the hopper (i.e., houselight and keylight off, food key illuminated, feedback following food-key pecks) were gradually removed across phases while the dependent relation between hopper availability and variable-interval-schedule key pecks was maintained. Rates of pecking the variable-interval-schedule key decreased to low levels and rates of food-key pecks increased when variable-interval-schedule key pecks did not produce hopper-correlated stimuli. In Experiment 2, pigeons initially pecked a single key under a variable-interval 60-s schedule. Then the dependent relation between hopper presentation and key pecks was eliminated by arranging a variable-time 60-s schedule. When rates of pecking had decreased to low levels, conditions were changed so that pecks during the final 5 s of each interval changed the keylight color from green to amber. When pecking produced these hopper-correlated stimuli, pecking occurred at high rates, despite the absence of a peck-food dependency. When peck-produced changes in keylight color were uncorrelated with food, rates of pecking fell to low levels. In Experiment 3, details (obtained delays, interresponse-time distributions, eating times) of the transition from high to low response rates produced by the introduction of a 3-s unsignaled delay were tracked from session to session in 3 pigeons that had been initially trained to peck under a conventional variable-interval 60-s schedule. Decreases in response rates soon after the transition to delayed reinforcement were accompanied by decreases in eating times and alterations in interresponse-time distributions. As response rates decreased and became stable, eating times increased and their variability decreased. These findings support an interpretation of the effects of delayed reinforcement that emphasizes the importance of hopper-observing behavior.     

"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.     

Acquisition and maintenance of autoshaped key pecking as a function of food stimulus and key stimulus similarity.

The results of a number of recent studies suggest that acquisitions of autoshaped key pecking in pigeons is affected by the similarity of the grain-hopper stimulus and response-key stimulus. In Experiment 1 this hypothesis was tested by training independent groups of pigeons to key peck under six different hopper-stimulus and key-stimulus similarity conditions, and three procedures containing either immediate reinforcement, variable delay of reinforcement, or omission of reinforcement for key pecking. Number of trials to acquisition was found to be related to the similarity variable. Maintained responding was affected by the response-reinforcer contingency. This effect was found both within and between subjects. Under two of the contingencies (automaintenance and omission), maintained responding continued to be affected by the similarity of the hopper stimulus and key stimulus. In Experiment 2 pigeons were given omission training with a hopper light on or off. Both acquisition and maintenance of key pecking were facilitated by the presence of the hopper light. The present findings suggest that much of the responding reported in various automatic shaping and training procedures may reflect the effects of key stimulus/food stimulus similarity.     

Topographical variations in behavior during autoshaping, automaintenance, and omission training

Three pigeons were exposed to an autoshaping and automaintenance procedure while a computer-controlled tracking system continuously recorded the position of the bird's head as it moved freely in the experimental chamber. Although only 2 birds pecked the key during the conditional stimulus (red keylight), all 3 birds exhibited stable patterns of approaching the conditional stimulus and withdrawing from the intertrial stimulus (white keylight). Subsequent exposure to an omission procedure, in which pecks on the red key cancelled the presentation of food upon the termination of the red keylight, greatly reduced key pecking, but approaching and pecking in the vicinity of the conditional stimulus were maintained at high levels. When the omission contingency was removed key pecking increased. During all phases the birds withdrew from the area of the white key and engaged in repetitive back-and-forth or circuiting movements during this intertrial stimulus. The data document (a) the strong control the conditional stimulus in autoshaping and automaintenance exerts over approach to the key and pecking motions whether or not the conditional stimulus elicits key pecking at a high level; and (b) withdrawal from the vicinity of the key and the occurrence of stereotypic behavior during the intertrial interval.     

Enhancement of conditioned reinforcement by uncertainty

Pigeons were trained in three conditions. In the baseline condition, the birds responded on a fixed-interval schedule with the response key white. When the interval was completed, the key turned either red or green for a delay interval that was terminated by a grain presentation dependent on no key pecks during the final 2 sec. In the uncertainty condition, no grain was presented at the end of the delay periods when the key was red. In the certainty condition, the white light appeared only on occasions when pecking would turn the key green and produce food. Otherwise, the key was illuminated red throughout the total time period. The highest response rate in white occurred in the uncertainty condition, the next highest in the certainty condition, and the lowest in baseline. The results suggest that uncertainty facilitated responding, although uncertainty is not a necessary condition for conditioned reinforcement.     

Key pecking in pigeons produced by pairing keylight with inaccessible grain

In Experiment I, keylight was paired with inaccessible grain delivery (under two conditions of keylight intensity) to determine if autoshaping would occur in the absence of primary reinforcement. In Experiment II, the procedure was repeated with accessible grain, for comparison. In Experiment III, the procedures were repeated with explicitly unpaired presentations of keylight and either inaccessible or accessible grain. The results indicated that key pecking occurred as quickly in the presence of keylight pairings with inaccessible grain as with accessible grain, though (except for one bird) key pecking was not maintained with inaccessible grain. Furthermore, compared to the dim keylight, the bright keylight greatly suppressed key pecking when paired with inaccessible grain, and reduced the rate of key pecking when paired with accessible grain. Little key pecking occurred in groups exposed to explicitly unpaired presentations of keylight (whether bright or dim) and grain (whether accessible or inaccessible). When the birds in Experiment III were retested with explicitly paired presentations of keylight and grain, little key pecking was observed, suggesting suppressive effects of prior explicitly unpaired presentations. It is suggested that the effects of key-brightness manipulation were produced by the association of grain with cues other than the response key, or by distraction produced by partial illumination of the grain hopper.     

Effect of delay-interval stimuli on delayed symbolic matching to sample in the pigeon

In Experiment 1, food-deprived pigeons received delayed symbolic matching to sample training in a darkened Skinner box. Trials began with the illumination of the grain feeder lamp (no food sample), or illumination of this lamp, accompanied by the raising of the feeder tray (food sample). After a delay of a few seconds, the two side response keys were illuminated, one with red and one with green light, with positions counterbalanced over trials. Pecking the red (green) comparison produced grain reinforcement if the trial had started with food (no food); pecking red after a no-food sample or green after a food sample was not reinforced. Once matching performance was stable, four stimuli were presented during the delay interval, and their effects on matching accuracy were evaluated. Both illumination of the houselight and the center key with white geometric forms decreased matching accuracy, whereas presentation of a tone and vibration of the test chamber did not. In Experiment 2, pecking the red center key was reinforced with food according to a variable interval schedule. The effects of occasional brief presentations of the four stimuli used in the first experiment on ongoing pecking were assessed. The houselight and form disturbed key pecking, but the tone and vibration did not. Thus, stimuli that interfered with delayed matching also interfered with simple operant behavior. Implications of these results for theories of remembering are discussed.     

The disruption of autoshaped key pecking in the pigeon by food-tray illumination

Two experiments investigated the effect of food-tray illumination on pecking a lighted key that signalled food presentation. Pigeons key pecked less when both feeder and key stimuli preceded grain delivery than when the keylight alone signalled food. This detractive influence of grain-tray illumination did not result after prior pairings of the keylight with food. The involvement of associative and physical variables in autoshaping the pigeon's key peck is considered in light of these findings.     

The effects of reinforcement upon the prepecking behaviors of pigeons in the autoshaping experiment

The autoshaping procedure confounds the effects of pairing a keylight and food with the effect of adventitious food reinforcement of responses that typically occur before the pecking response. In Experiment I, acquisition of the orientation to the key, the approach toward the key, and the peck at the key were systematically monitored. Orientations to the key and approaches toward the key frequently occurred in contiguity with food presentation before peck acquisition. In Experiment II, a negative contingency procedure was used to assess the sensitivity of the approach toward the key to its consequences. When the approach toward the key resulted in nonreinforcement, the probability of occurrence of that response decreased to zero despite repeated light-food pairings. In Experiment III, peck probability was shown to be determined during the approach toward the key by the presence of stimuli that had previously been either paired or nonpaired with food. In Experiment IV, it was shown that the effects of the stimulus present during the approach toward the key were not due solely to the effects of pairing that stimulus with food. Autoshaped key pecking appears to be determined by the interacting effects of stimulus-reinforcer and response-reinforcer variables upon orientations to, approaches toward, and pecks at the lighted key.     

Effects of search cost on foraging and feeding: a three-component chain analysis

An experiment determined whether pigeons minimize number of key pecks per food delivery and maintain their baseline intake of food while key pecking on a three-component chain schedule. Pigeons at either 80% or 100% body weight obtained all their food during baseline and contingency sessions. During baseline sessions, pecks on the left and center keys had no consequences; each peck on the right key activated the feeder. During contingency sessions, pigeons key pecked on a three-component chain schedule simulating components of a foraging chain. In the search component either 3, 9 or 15 key pecks (varied parametrically across blocks of sessions) on the left key produced a stimulus on the middle key, indicating an encounter with either the low-cost prey (3 key pecks) or an equally probable high-cost prey (21 key pecks). In the procurement component the pigeon pecked either: (a) the left key once, thus returning to the search component, or (b) the middle key either 3 or 21 times, which activated the right response key. In the handling component one peck on the right key operated the feeder. The pigeons always procured the low-cost prey and minimized the number of key pecks per hopper by procuring the high-cost prey when the search-cost ratio was high (15 key pecks) but not when it was low (3 key pecks). All pigeons maintained their baselines of eating during contingency sessions by key pecking more frequently and eating more efficiently. The 80% body-weight birds produced higher overall rates of key pecking and eating. These results have implications for ecological theories of optimal foraging and for psychological theories of learned performance.     

Application of Bower's one-element model to paired-associate learning by pigeons

Bower's (1961) all-or-none model of human paired-associate learning was applied to individual data supplied by three pigeons. When the center one of three keys was illuminated with red light or with three white dots in a vertical array on a black ground, pecking on the left key was reinforced. When the center key was lighted green or with a horizontal array of three white dots on a black ground, pecking on the right key was reinforced. The left and right keys were illuminated with white light. The task was considered to be analogous to learning a paired-associate list of four pairs involving four stimulus items and two response items. The model was evaluated by comparing the following model predictions with values obtained from each animal: trials-to-criterion, standard deviation of trials-to-criterion, standard deviation of errors-to-criterion, mean error runs, mean error runs of lengths one to four, and autocorrelations of errors of lags one to three. Most of the predictions based upon the model were in close agreement with the obtained data.     

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

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

Delayed signal detection, differential reinforcement, and short-term memory in the pigeon.

In two discrete-trial delayed-detection experiments, six pigeons were trained on dependent concurrent variable-interval schedules. Pecking a red side key was reinforced when the brighter of two white lights (S1) had been presented on the center key, and pecking a green side key was reinforced when the duller of two white lights (S2) had been presented on the center key. Incorrect responses were red side-key pecks following S2 presentations and green side-key pecks following S1 presentations; these resulted in three-second blackouts. In Experiment 1, the time between presentation of S1 or S2 on the center key and the onset of the red and green side keys was varied nonsystematically from 0.06 seconds to 19.69 seconds across experimental conditions. Stimulus discriminability decreased as the stimulus-choice delay increased. A rectangular-hyperbolic function better described this decrease in discriminability over time than did a negative-exponential function. In Experiment 2, at each of three stimulus-choice delays (0.06, 3.85, and 10.36 seconds), relative reinforcer frequency for correct responses to the red and green side keys was varied by changing the values of the dependent concurrent variable-interval schedules. The sensitivity of choice to relative reinforcer frequency was independent of the decrease in stimulus discriminability with increasing stimulus-choice delay.     

Positive and negative conditioned suppression in the pigeon: Effects of the locus and modality of the CS

In Experiment I, four pigeons were exposed to trials in which a 12-sec key light illumination was followed by free food. These trials were superimposed upon a baseline of key pecking for food reinforcement on a variable-interval schedule. When the signal for food was on the operant key, response rate was substantially higher during the signal than during the baseline procedure. When the signal was on a second, signal key, operant responding was suppressed during the signal and substantial pecking of the signal key occurred. The sum of signal key and operant key pecks far exceeded the operant baseline rate of responding. An explanation of opposite results obtained with rats and pigeons as subjects in experiments of this type was suggested in terms of the spatial relation between the signal for free food and the operant target which usually characterizes these experiments. Experiment II assessed the importance of signal location when shock rather than food was the US. Suppression of operant key pecking was unaffected by signal location. Experiment III assessed the relative effectiveness of visual and auditory stimuli (clicks) as signals for food and shock, and found that all combinations of signal and US were equally effective in suppressing operant key responding. The three experiments together suggested that the identification of important effects of species—typical behavior in one experimental situation does not imply that there will be like effects in similar situations.     

Reciprocal response interactions in concurrent variable-interval and discrete-trial fixed-ratio schedules

Abstract.— Pecking a red key by pigeons was reinforced with grain on a continuously accessible variable-interval schedule. Pecking a second key was reinforced on a discrete-trial fixed-ratio schedule; occasionally the second key was illuminated green and after a single run on the fixed-ratio schedule a reinforcer was presented and the green light was turned off. The experiment investigated the effects of acquisition, extinction, and re-acquisition of pecking the second key. All pigeons changed over immediately from pecking the red key to pecking the green key whenever the green light controlled a high rate of pecking this key. Pecking the red key was completely suppressed during pecking the green key. The experiment shows that a changeover from one response to a second response can come under discriminative control of a stimulus during which the second response is intermittently reinforced. All pigeons frequently emitted observing and orienting behaviors towards the dark key that was occasionally lit green.     

Sunk cost: pigeons (Columba livia), too, show bias to complete a task rather than shift to another

The sunk cost effect involves the bias to stay with an alternative because one has already invested resources, even when there is a better alternative available. In a series of experiments, at various points during a 30-peck requirement, pigeons (Columba livia) could choose between completing the response requirement (at a different location in Experiment 1 or the same location in Experiments 3 and 4) and switching to a constant number of pecks. In three experiments, the pigeons showed a bias to complete the pecks already started, even when that required more pecking. We also demonstrated that the bias depended on the initial investment and was not produced merely because the pigeons preferred a variable alternative over a fixed alternative. The deviation from optimal choice suggests that pigeons show a bias similar to the sunk cost effect in humans.     

Autoshaped responding: A baseline for studying stimulus preference

In an autoshaping procedure with pigeons, trials consisted of the illumination of two keys, each with a different color, and then a response-independent feeder operation. Over successive conditions, all key-color pairs were arranged from the set of amber, red, green, and blue lamps. During sessions with a given pair, the left-right configuration of the colors varied irregularly, and the two colors alternated in illuminating the feeder. With one red and one green key, for example, red appeared sometimes on the left and sometimes on the right, and the feeder was alternately lit red or green on successive trials. Both total pecks and proportion of trials with at least one peck on a key of a given color were generally greater for red and amber than for green and blue, and relations among preferences were generally transitive across different color pairs. Repeating the procedure with decreased red and amber intensities and increased green and blue intensities reduced red and amber pecking relative to green and blue pecking, implying that differences in responding were determined more strongly by intensive than by chromatic properties of the stimuli.     

Stimulus control of Pavlovian facilitation

Two experiments were conducted using an autoshaping procedure with pigeons to examine whether dimensional stimulus control by a Pavlovian facilitator parallels the control established following operant discrimination training. Facilitation training consisted of the presentation of a black vertical line on a white background as the B stimulus in a feature-positive discrimination in which the A stimulus (white keylight) was followed by grain presentation only if preceded by B. In this way, B facilitates or sets the occasion for pecking at A. Subsequent testing for generalization along the line-orientation dimension produced decremental gradients when the facilitation paradigm incorporated an explicit feature-negative stimulus (B−). These results parallel the decremental control obtained following operant discrimination training and suggest that Pavlovian facilitators and instrumental discriminative stimuli are functionally equivalent.