Pigeons' spatial memory: factors affecting delayed matching of key location.

The delayed-matching-to-sample procedure was modified to study pigeons' spatial memory. Nine pecking keys, arranged as a three-by-three matrix, served as the spatial cues. Trials began with a brief "ready" stimulus (dimming of the houselight). Then a randomly chosen key was lit briefly as a sample. After a short delay the sample key was lit again along with one of the other eight keys. A peck at the key that had served as the sample produced grain reinforcement, where as a peck to the other key produced only the intertrial interval. After delayed matching of key location was learned, the effects of sample and delay duration, number of keys illuminated as sample and comparisons, and organization of three-key samples were studied. Matching accuracy decreased as sample duration decreased, delay increased, the number of locations serving as samples increased, the number and proximity of comparisons increased, and when the three-key samples were "discontinuous" rather than "lines".     

Most directed forgetting in pigeons can be attributed to the absence of reinforcement on forget trials during training or to other procedural artifacts.

In research on directed forgetting in pigeons using delayed matching procedures, remember cues, presented in the delay interval between sample and comparisons, have been followed by comparisons (i.e., a memory test), whereas forget cues have been followed by one of a number of different sample-independent events. The source of directed forgetting in delayed matching to sample in pigeons was examined in a 2 x 2 design by independently manipulating whether or not forget-cue trials in training ended with reinforcement and whether or not forget-cue trials in training included a simultaneous discrimination (involving stimuli other than those used in the matching task). Results were consistent with the hypothesis that reinforced responding following forget cues is sufficient to eliminate performance deficits on forget-cue probe trials. Only when reinforcement was omitted on forget-cue trials in training (whether a discrimination was required or not) was there a decrement in accuracy on forget-cue probe trials. When reinforcement is present, however, the pattern of responding established during and following a forget cue in training may also play a role in the directed forgetting effect. These findings support the view that much of the evidence for directed forgetting using matching procedures may result from motivational and behavioral artifacts rather than the loss of memory.     

Quantification of the effects of chlorpromazine on performance under delayed matching to sample in pigeons.

The effects of four doses of chlorpromazine (dose range 0.5 to 12.5 mg/kg) on performance under a delayed matching-to-sample procedure in pigeons was investigated, using the exponential model of memory (White, 1985). Performance was measured using a bias-free measure of discriminability, log d (Davison & Tustin, 1978), and negative exponential functions were fitted to individual-subject and group data at each dose level. A decrease in matching accuracy was found to be caused by an increase in the rate of forgetting, b, and a decrease in the initial discriminability, log d0. Changes in rate of forgetting and discriminability occurred at doses that had no statistically significant effect on response latency. The exponential model of memory accounted well for the data and provided a useful way of quantifying the effects of chlorpromazine on the processes involved in delayed matching-to-sample performance.     

Detecting a nonevent: Delayed presence-versus-absence discrimination in pigeons

Eight pigeons were trained on a delayed presence-versus-absence discrimination paradigm in which a sample stimulus was presented on some trials but not on others. If a sample was presented, then a response to one choice key produced food. If no sample was presented, a response to the other choice key produced food. The basic finding was that performance remained constant and well above 50% correct on no-sample trials as the retention interval increased, whereas performance dropped precipitously (to below 50% correct) on sample trials. In the second phase of the experiment, all of the trials were no-sample trials, and reinforcers were delivered probabilistically for one group of pigeons and according to time-based schedules for the other group. The exact reinforcement probabilities used in Phase 2 were those calculated to be in effect on no-sample trials in Phase 1 (according to a discrete-state model of performance). Subjects did not show exclusive preference for the richer alternative on no-sample trials in the first phase, but those in the probabilistic group developed near-exclusive preference for the richer alternative during the second phase. These data are inconsistent with the predictions of the discrete-state model, but are easily accommodated by an account based on signal detection theory, which also can be applied effectively to discrimination of event duration and the “subjective shortening” effect.     

Delayed stimulus control: recall for single and relational stimuli.

In a discrete-trial symbolic matching-to-sample procedure, pigeons' left-key responses were reinforced following presentation of one center-key sample, and right-key responses were reinforced following presentation of another. Recallability was measured by the difference between log ratios of left to right responses following each sample. In Experiment 1, samples were successively presented same or different wavelengths in the relational discrimination, or individual wavelengths in the single discrimination. The rate at which recallability decreased with increasing delay since sample presentation was the same for single and relational discriminations, but the initial level of performance differed, indicating that the relational discrimination was more difficult. In Experiment 2, recall functions for easy and difficult discriminations between individual wavelengths also differed in levels of initial performance but not in rate of decrement of recallability over time. Recall for stimuli differing in complexity may therefore reflect differences in discrimination difficulty.     

Delay-interval illumination changes interfere with pigeon short-term memory.

Pigeons acquired a successive depayed matching-to-sample task at delay intervals ranging from 2.5 to 7 seconds. Test sessions were conducted during which delay-interval illumination conditions were changed from those illumination conditions that prevailed during the baselines. Compared to baseline delayed matching performance, changing delay-interval illumination disrupted matching. This disruption occurred whether the change in delay-interval illumination represented an increase or a decrease, relative to the baseline, and whether there was or was not a change in illumination during the test session. It was concluded that illumination per se introduced during delay intervals of delayed matching tasks does not interfere with pigeon short-term memory. Rather, a change in delay-interval illumination, relative to the baseline, appears to retroactively interfere in pigeon short-term memory.     

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.     

DOES EFFORT PLAY A ROLE IN THE EFFECT OF RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS ON DELAYED MATCHING TO SAMPLE?

The possible role of "effort" in the accuracy of pigeons' performance on a delayed matching-to-sample procedure was investigated by examining the effects of response requirements that accompanied a trial-initiating stimulus and that accompanied a sample stimulus. In the first experiment, the effect of varying the size of a fixed-ratio requirement for responses during an initiating stimulus was compared to that of varying a similar requirement for responses during the sample stimulus. Accuracy increased reliably with increases in the ratio scheduled during the sample stimulus, but was not significantly affected by increases in the ratio scheduled on the key during the initiating stimulus. In another phase of Experiment 1, sample duration was held constant while the ratio requirement was varied during the initiating stimulus. Again, accuracy of matching to sample was not significantly affected by the size of the ratio scheduled during the initiating stimulus. Experiment 2 provided a systematic replication of these results in another group of pigeons and included a more detailed analysis of responding. These results support the view that increases in sample-response requirement facilitate accuracy of delayed matching by increasing the durations of exposure to the sample stimuli, and do not support a role of effort in the sample-response effect. In Experiment 3, the facilitative effect of responses on the sample but not of those on the initiating stimulus was replicated using a simultaneous matching-to-sample procedure. This finding provides further evidence against an interpretation of response-requirement effects that appeals to effort; the finding also suggests that sample exposure might affect initial discrimination of the sample rather than remembering the sample.     

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.     

Use of an ambiguous-sample procedure to establish a cue to forget in pigeons

Pigeons were trained on a variation of the matching-to-sample task in which on double-sample trials two samples, one associated with each of the comparison stimuli, were presented successively. Responding to the comparison associated with the first sample was reinforced on half the double-sample trials, and responding to the comparison associated with the second sample was reinforced on the remaining half. One of two postsample stimuli was presented following the termination of each colored sample. A vertical line was presented after a correct or target sample, and a horizontal line was presented after an incorrect or interfering sample. With extended training, each bird demonstrated above-chance accuracy on double-sample trials, providing prima facie evidence that one or both of the postsample stimuli exerted control over matching behavior. Experiment 2 provided evidence that the horizontal line functioned as a cue to forget the code activated by the preceding sample stimulus. It was concluded that a condition sufficient to establish a postsample stimulus as a cue to forget is that the postsample immediately follow presentation of a sample that, if it were to control test responding, would lead to nonreinforcement.     

Formation of transitivity in conditional matching to sample by pigeons

Four homing pigeons were trained over 5 months in a zero-delay, “arbitrary” matching-to-sample procedure with sample and comparison stimuli presented on any of three response keys. Birds were also required to complete a fixed-ratio 10 requirement on both sample and comparison stimuli to terminate their presentation. The procedure resulted in the establishment of relations that were not specifically trained and that can be characterized by the property of transitivity in a stimulus equivalence context. This result was in contrast with the findings obtained from most previous research with nonhuman subjects.     

Delayed matching-to-sample performance of hens: Effects of sample duration and response requirements during the sample

Six domestic hens were trained under a delayed matching-to-sample procedure with red and green keylights as sample and comparison stimuli and a 1.5-s delay interval. The hens were trained to stop pecking the sample stimuli when a tone sounded. Duration of the sample stimuli (2 to 10 s) and the number of pecks required on the key on which these stimuli were presented (0 to 10) were altered across conditions. Both the response requirement on the sample key and the duration of sample presentations affected accuracy. These findings are in agreement with those of earlier studies using other species and somewhat different procedures.     

Fixed-ratio discrimination: effects of intermittent reinforcement

Four pigeons had discrimination training that required the choice of a left side-key after completing a fixed-ratio 10 on the center key, and a right side-key choice after fixed-ratio 20. Correct choices were reinforced on various fixed-interval, fixed-ratio, random-interval, and random-ratio schedules. When performance was examined across successive 15-second intervals (fixed-interval and fixed-ratio schedules) accuracy was high in the first 15-second interval, decreased in one or several of the next 15-second intervals, and then increased again as reinforcement was approached. When performance was examined across correct trials on fixed-interval and fixed-ratio schedules, accuracy was lowest immediately after reinforcement, followed by a systematic increase in accuracy as the number of correct choices increased. These patterns were due primarily to errors on fixed-ratio 20 trials. Systematic accuracy patterns did not occur on random-interval or random-ratio schedules. The results indicate that when choice patterns differed on fixed-interval and fixed-ratio schedules, the differences were due to the method of data analysis.     

Pigeons may not remember the stimuli that reinforced their recent behavior

In two experiments the conditioned reinforcing and delayed discriminative stimulus functions of stimuli that signal delays to reinforcement were studied. Pigeons' pecks to a center key produced delayed-matching-to-sample trials according to a variable-interval 60-s (or 30-s in 1 pigeon) schedule (Experiment 1) or a multiple variable-interval 20-s variable-interval 120-s schedule (Experiment 2). The trials consisted of a 2-s illumination of one of two sample key colors followed by delays ranging across phases from 0.1 to 27.0 s followed in turn by the presentation of matching and nonmatching comparison stimuli on the side keys. Pecks to the key color that matched the sample were reinforced with 4-s access to grain. Under some conditions of Experiment 1, pecks to nonmatching comparison stimuli produced a 4-s blackout and the start of the next interval. Under other conditions of Experiment 1 and each condition of Experiment 2, pecks to nonmatching stimuli had no effect and trials ended only when pigeons pecked the other, matching stimulus and received food. The functions relating pretrial response rates to delays differed markedly from those relating matching-to-sample accuracy to delays. Specifically, response rates remained relatively high until the longest delays (15.0 to 27.0 s) were arranged, at which point they fell to low levels. Matching accuracy was high at short delays, but fell to chance at delays between 3.0 and 9.0 s. In Experiment 2, both matching accuracy and response rates remained high over a wider range of delays in the variable-interval 120-s component relative to the variable-interval 20-s component. The difference in matching accuracy between the components was not due to an increased tendency in the variable-interval 20-s component toward proactive interference following short intervals. Thus, under these experimental conditions the conditioned reinforcing and the delayed discriminative functions of the sample stimulus depended on the same variables (delay and variable-interval value), but were nevertheless dissociated.     

Same/different concept learning in the pigeon: the effect of negative instances and prior adaptation to transfer stimuli

Pigeons were trained on a matching-to-sample or oddity-from-sample task with shapes (circle and plus). Half of each group was exposed to “negative instance” trials i.e., for matching birds, neither comparison key matched the sample, and for oddity birds both comparison keys matched the sample. When all birds were transferred to a new task involving colors (red and green), nonshifted birds (transferred from matching to matching, or oddity to oddity) performed significantly better than shifted birds (transferred from matching to oddity, or oddity to matching), but only if they had experienced negative instances of the training concept. When all birds were exposed to negative instances of the transfer task and then transferred to a new color task (yellow and blue), dramatic transfer effects were observed. The effect of pre-exposure to the yellow and blue colors, in order to reduce transfer-stimulus novelty, had a minor effect on transfer.     

The effect of increased response requirements on discriminative performance of the domestic hen in a visual acuity task.

Six domestic hens were trained in a spatial discrimination task. A controlled reinforcement procedure insured that the ratio of scheduled and obtained reinforcement remained equal. Gray stimuli and gratings ranging in spatial frequency from 1 to 10 cycles per millimeter were presented in seven descending series of probes. The response requirement to the sample key was varied from fixed ratio 1 to fixed ratio 40 in seven experimental conditions. An increase in response requirements from fixed ratio 1 to fixed ratio 5 and fixed ratio 10 resulted in significantly higher accuracy at discriminable grating values. Further increases in response requirements did not consistently improve performance. Generally, response biases increased and occasionally became extreme for probes at finer gratings with increased response requirements.