Context specificity of operant discriminative performance in pigeons: II. Necessary and sufficient conditions

Six experiments were performed to explore the necessary and sufficient conditions for producing context specificity of discriminative operant performance in pigeons. In Experiment 1, pigeons learned a successive discrimination (red S+/blue S−) in two chambers that had a particular odor present and between which they were frequently switched. The birds subsequently learned the reversal (blue S+/ red S−) in one of these chambers with a different odor present. When switched to the alternative chamber, although the odor and the reinforcement contingency were still appropriate to the reversal, performance appropriate to the original discrimination recurred in subjects for which the houselights were on during training and testing but not for those for which the houselights were off. This indicated the importance of visual contextual cues in producing context specificity. Experiment 2 showed that the frequent switching between boxes in initial training was of no consequence, presumably because the apparatus cues were highly salient to the subjects. Experiment 3 showed significantly less context specificity when odor cues were omitted. Experiment 4 showed that simply using a different reinforced stimulus in each phase of training was ineffective in producing context specificity. Experiment 5 showed that the generalization test procedure used in Experiment 4 was sensitive to context specificity when discrimination-reversal training was used with different odors in the two training phases. Experiment 6 replicated the results of Experiment 4, but then showed that when different odors accompanied the two training phases, context specificity was obtained with the single-stimulus paradigm. Thus in both single-stimulus and discrimination-reversal paradigms, redundant odor cues potentiated learning about apparatus cues.     

Context specificity of conditioned-reinforcement effects on discrimination acquisition

Pigeons were trained on a series of reversals of a simultaneous form discrimination in which the trial outcomes were separated from the choice responses by an 8-s delay interval. Different conditions were defined by the stimuli occurring during the two halves of the delay interval. Discrimination learning was greatly facilitated by having differential stimuli during the delay following correct versus incorrect choices. When the differential stimuli appeared only at the midpoint of the delay, some facilitation occurred relative to when no different stimuli occurred, but there was substantially less facilitation than when the differential stimuli occurred immediately contingent on choice. A reversed-stimulus condition, in which the stimulus at the onset of the delay following a correct choice was the same as that during the last segment of the delay following an incorrect choice, and the stimulus at the onset of the delay following an incorrect choice was the same as that preceding food during the last segment of the delay following a correct choice, also facilitated discrimination learning relative to the nondifferential stimulus conditions.     

Factors affecting conditional discrimination learning by pigeons

In Experiment 1 (within subjects) and Experiment 2 (between subjects) it was shown that the sequential training of pigeons on a color discrimination and then on its reversal, each in a different floor-tilt/texture context, failed to produce conditional control of discriminative performance by those contexts. Daily alternation between the two problems (with correlated contexts) was successful, however. In each of these experiments conditional control was better reflected in generalization test performance in extinction than during sessions of training with reinforcement.     

Category discrimination by pigeons using five polymorphous features

Eight pigeons were trained to discriminate between sets of color photographs of natural scenes. The scenes differed along five two-valued dimensions (site, weather, camera distance, camera orientation, and camera height), and all combinations of the feature values were used. One value of each dimension was designated as positive, and slides containing three or more positive feature values were members of the positive stimulus set. Thus, each feature had an equal, low, correlation with reinforcement, and all features had zero correlations with each other. Seven of the 8 pigeons learned this discrimination, and their responding came under the control of all five features. Within the positive and negative stimulus sets, response rates were higher to stimuli that contained more positive feature values. Once discrimination had been achieved, reversal training was given using a subset of the slides. In this subset, only a single feature was correlated with reinforcement. All pigeons learned this reversal successfully and generalized it to additional photographs with the same feature content. After reversal, the original reinforcement contingencies were reinstated, and training was continued using all the slides except those that had been used in reversal. Reversal generalized to these slides to some extent. Analysis of the response rates to individual slides showed that, compared with prereversal training, only the feature that had been subjected to reversal contingencies showed a reversed correlation with response rate. The remaining features showed the same correlation with response rate as they had before reversal training. Thus, reversal on some members of a category following category discrimination training led to generalization to stimuli within the category that were not involved in the reversal, but not to features that were not reversed. It is therefore inappropriate to refer to the pigeons as learning a concept.     

Conditional discrimination with ambiguous stimuli.

Five pigeons learned a two-key conditional discrimination. When background color on both keys was red, pecks on the key with a horizontal line produced food. When the color was green, pecks on the key with a vertical line produced food. During part of the experiment, color was presented on only one of the keys. It was found that accuracy was higher when color was combined with the line stimulus correlated with nonreinforcement. In another part of the experiment, color was presented on both keys but a line was present only on one. Accuracy was higher when the line accompanied the nonreinforced option than when the line accompanied the reinforced option. Superior performance when the combined stimuli were displayed on the nonfood key may be explained by the association of different components of the compound stimuli with reinforcement or as the result of rules pigeons follow in solving conditional discriminations.     

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.     

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.     

Stimulus-specific contrast effects during operant discrimination learning

In two experiments, pigeons' responding was equally reinforced in the presence of four line-orientation stimuli. Responding was then reinforced when only two of the four orientation stimuli were present; the remaining two orientations appeared during extinction. Response rates were often highest in the stimulus adjacent to the orientations presented during extinction and often lowest in that orientation adjacent to the orientations presented with reinforcement. These effects were stronger and more persistent when the stimuli were separated by a smaller angle, rendering the discrimination more difficult. These and other data suggest that discrimination training may not be accurately explained in terms of the simple effects of reinforcement and nonreinforcement associated with isolated stimuli, nor by accounts that depend upon stimulus generalization. Recent accounts of contrast that depend upon “emotionality” produced by nonreinforced responding or upon reinforcement-elicited responses are also difficult to apply to these data.     

Errorless learning of a conditional temporal discrimination

In the present study we extended errorless learning to a conditional temporal discrimination. Pigeons' responses to a left-red key after a 2-s sample and to a right-green key after a 10-s sample were reinforced. There were two groups: One learned the discrimination through trial and error and the other through an errorless learning procedure. Then, both groups were presented with three types of tests. First, they were exposed to intermediate durations between 2 s and 10 s, and given a choice between both keys (stimulus generalization test). Second, a delay from 1 s to 16 s was included between the offset of the sample and the onset of the choice keys (delay test). Finally, pigeons learned a new discrimination in which the stimuli were switched (reversal test). Results showed that pigeons from the Errorless group made significantly fewer errors than those in the Trial-and-Error group. Both groups performed similarly during the stimulus generalization test and the reversal test, but results of the delay test suggested that, on long stimulus trials, responding in the errorless training group was less disrupted by delays.     

Discrimination of direction of movements in pigeons following previous experience of motion/static discrimination

Two experiments examined pigeons' discrimination of directional movement using pictorial images shown on computer monitors. Stimuli consisted of the movement of a bird against a stationary background or the movement of the background behind a stationary bird. In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained to discriminate either leftward or rightward motion of either the bird or the background from stationary frames drawn from the same movies. The background-discrimination group acquired the discrimination faster than the bird-discrimination group. In Experiment 2, transfer of the discrimination from the task of Experiment 1 to a discrimination between motion directions was examined. Most of the pigeons learned this discrimination rapidly, whereas in a pilot study in which direction discrimination was trained without previous static/movement discrimination, learning was poor. It appears that an experimental history of movement against stationary discrimination promoted the pigeons' learning of the directional motion discrimination.     

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.     

Reaction times of pigeons on a wavelength discrimination task

After extensive pretraining, three pigeons were exposed in 2-second trials to a random series of 14 light wavelengths, ranging in one nanometer (nm) steps from 575 nanometers to 589 nanometers. Responses to one of the wavelengths, 582 nanometers, were intermittently reinforced. The relative frequency of response approached 1.0 at 582 nanometers, and decreased with progressively higher and lower wavelengths. Reaction times shorter than about 0.2 second occurred with a low frequency that was largely independent of wavelength. Wavelength controlled the frequency of longer reaction times, but did not affect the distribution of these reaction times. Consequently, receiver-operating characteristic curves constructed by using reaction time as a rating measure did not conform to the signal-detection model, in contrast to such conformity when response rate is used in a similar way. The data suggest that stimulus onset as such triggers early response emission with some small probability; the probability of responses with longer latency is controlled by wavelength, but their time of emission is controlled by some independent process.     

Discrimination of methadone and cocaine by pigeons without explicit discrimination training.

Pigeons were trained to peck a key on a variable-interval 2-min schedule of food reinforcement. Prior to each session, either 2.0 mg/kg methadone (n = 3), 3.0 mg/kg cocaine (n = 4), or 5.6 mg/kg cocaine (n = 2) was administered. When each pigeon's rate of pecking was stable, a range of doses of the training drug and saline were administered prior to 20-min extinction sessions separated by at least four training sessions. Rate of pecking during these extinction tests was generally an increasing function of dose, with the lowest rates obtained following saline and low doses and the highest rates obtained following doses near the training doses. Dose functions from pigeons trained with 5.6 mg/kg cocaine were steeper than those from pigeons trained with 3.0 mg/kg cocaine. Pigeons trained with methadone or 3.0 mg/kg cocaine were then given discrimination training, in which food reinforcement followed drug administration and 20-min extinction sessions followed saline administration. Rates of pecking under these conditions quickly diverged until near-zero rates were obtained following saline and high rates were obtained following drug. Discrimination training steepened dose functions for the training drugs, and the effects of several other substituted drugs depended on the pharmacology of the training drug. The pigeons trained with 5.6 mg/kg cocaine were tested with d-amphetamine, methadone, and morphine prior to discrimination training. d-Amphetamine increased rates dose dependently, and methadone and morphine did not. The results suggest that discriminative control by methadone and cocaine was established without explicit discrimination training.     

Why pigeons say what they do: reinforcer magnitude and response requirement effects on say responding in say-do correspondence

The effects of reinforcer magnitude and response requirement on pigeons' say choices in an experimental homologue of human say-do correspondence were assessed in two experiments. The procedure was similar to a conditional discrimination procedure except the pigeons chose both a sample stimulus (the say component) and a comparison stimulus that corresponded to it (the do component). Correspondence was trained on red, green, and white key colors before the duration of food presentations following correspondence on each key color (Experiment 1) and the number of key pecks required as the say response on each key color (Experiment 2) were manipulated in an attempt to influence the initial say response. The frequency of say responses on each key color coincided with programmed changes in the duration of food presentations and the key-peck requirements assigned to each key color. Correspondence accuracy remained stable in all conditions, even those in which the say responding occurred primarily on two of the three key colors. Implications for human behavior are discussed.     

Reproduction memory of two-event sequences in pigeons

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

Short-term remembering of discriminative stimuli in pigeons.

Pigeons learned to peck the left or right of two white keys depending on whether a red or a green stimulus was displayed on a third key. The opportunity to peck the white keys was then dealyed for zero to six seconds after the red or green (to-be-remembered) stimulus. On half the trials, the feeder operated during the delay to interrupt behavior that might mediate discriminated responding. No events were scheduled on the remaining trials. In a later condition, the pigeons had the opportunity to peck the white keys during the delay. In general, accuracy decreased as delay increased in all conditions, but performance was least accurate following feeder operations and most accurate when pecking was allowed during the delay. The procedures may be analogous to varying the opportunity for rehearsal in studies of human short-term memory.     

The emergence of symmetry in a conditional discrimination task using different responses as propioceptive samples in pigeons

In Experiment 1, 10 pigeons were exposed to a successive symbolic matching-to-sample procedure in which the sample was generated by the pigeons' own behavior. Each trial began with both response keys illuminated white, one being the "correct" key and the other the "incorrect" key. The pigeons had no way of discriminating which key was correct and which incorrect, since these roles were assigned on a random basis with the same probability of 0.5 for each key. A fixed ratio of five responses was required on the correct key. However, each time the pigeon pecked the incorrect key, the correct key response counter reset. Five consecutive pecks on the correct key was the only way to end this component, and switch off both key lights. Two seconds later, these same keys were illuminated again, one green and the other red (comparison stimuli). Now, if the correct white key had been on the left, a peck at one color produced food, and if the correct white key had been on the right, a peck at the other color produced food. When the pigeons had learned this discrimination, they were exposed to several symmetry tests (simultaneous presentations of both keys illuminated the same color-i.e., both red or both green), in order to interchange the sample with the comparison stimuli. In Experiment 2, the importance of requiring discrimination between the samples and between the comparisons was analyzed. In Experiment 3, we compared the results of Experiment 1 with a slightly different experiment, which resulted in discrimination of key position, an exteroceptive stimulus. The results showed that symmetry emerged only when different responses were used as samples.     

Stimulus stringing by pigeons

Pigeons were trained to peck one, two, three, and then four colors in a predetermined sequence from a five-key array where, over trials, each color appeared equally often in each position of the array. Incorrect pecks resulted in a buzzer and trial termination, with the same array presented for the next trial. Correct pecks produced feedback and correct strings could produce food. All subjects performed at a high level of accuracy with no difference at asymptote between a continuous and a mixed spectral sequence as the required order. Transfer to a new set of arrays had little effect on accuracy. Errors forward in the sequence had the highest probability, followed by repeat errors, backward errors, and dark-key errors. Some arrays had a higher level of accuracy than others but a corresponding systematic variable could not be identified.     

Repeated acquisition of conditional discriminations

A new technique was developed to study the repeated acquisition of conditional discriminations. Using a discrete trial procedure, pigeons were required to learn during each session a different two-member chain of conditional discriminations. Key color and geometric forms were used as stimuli. After the pigeons had reached a steady state of relearning (40 to 60 sessions), the technique was used to investigate variables that have previously been shown to affect the repeated acquisition of response sequences. Various (0 to 90 seconds) durations of timeout for errors were investigated in Experiment I. The stimulus change associated with a timeout, rather than its duration, was found to be the critical variable in acquisition of the discrimination. Extended training on a single chain was found to reduce total errors across sessions in Experiment II. Extended training (three sessions) did not, however, change the pattern of within-session error reduction. In some cases, extended training facilitated acquisition of a partially reversed discrimination. In Experiment III, color rather than chain position was found to control behavior, for three of the four birds, as the second stimulus dimension in the conditional situation. The results of these experiments replicate and extend previous findings concerning some of the variables that affect the repeated acquisition of response sequences.     

Transfer of oddity-from-sample performance in pigeons

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