The role of observing and attention in establishing stimulus control.

Early theorists (Skinner, Spence) interpreted discrimination learning in terms of the strengthening of the response to one stimulus and its weakening to the other. But this analysis does not account for the increasing independence of the two performances as training continues or for increases in control by dimensions of a stimulus other than the one used in training. Correlation of stimuli with different densities of reinforcement produces an increase in the behavior necessary to observe them, and greater observing of and attending to the relevant stimuli may account for the increase in control by these stimuli. The observing analysis also encompasses errorless training, and the selective nature of observing explains the feature-positive effect and the relatively shallow gradients of generalization generated by negative discriminative stimuli. The effectiveness of the observing analysis in handling these special cases adds to the converging lines of evidence supporting its integrative power and thus its validity.     

Probability and delay of reinforcement as factors in discrete-trial choice.

Pigeons chose between two alternatives that differed in the probability of reinforcement and the delay to reinforcement. A peck on the red key always produced a delay of 5 s and then a possible reinforcer. The probability of reinforcement for responding on this key varied from .05 to 1.0 in different conditions. A response on the green key produced a delay of adjustable duration and then a possible reinforcer, with the probability of reinforcement ranging from .25 to 1.0 in different conditions. The green-key delay was increased or decreased many times per session, depending on a subject's previous choices. The purpose of these adjustments was to estimate an indifference point, or a delay that resulted in a subject's choosing each alternative about equally often. In conditions where the probability of reinforcement was five times higher on the green key, the green-key delay averaged about 12 s at the indifference point. In conditions where the probability of reinforcement was twice as high on the green key, the green-key delay at the indifference point was about 8 s with high probabilities and about 6 s with low probabilities. An analysis based on these results and those from studies on delay of reinforcement suggests that pigeons' choices are relatively insensitive to variations in the probability of reinforcement between .2 and 1.0, but quite sensitive to variations in probability between .2 and 0.     

An infrared system for the detection of a pigeon''s pecks at alphanumeric characters on a TV screen: the dependency of letter detection on the predictability of one letter by another.

Three pigeons pecked at letters of the alphabet and at the symbol "?" displayed on a computer-driven cathode ray screen. A 4 by 4 matrix of infrared emitting and detecting diodes and associated circuitry identified the location of a pigeon''s responses to the screen. Responses at the target letter T were probabilistically reinforced with food whenever T appeared in a string of three letters in the middle of the screen. Responses at the symbol "?" appearing below this string were probabilistically reinforced whenever T did not appear. The letter F anywhere in the three-character string either strongly predicted the occurrence of the target letter T, in two conditions, or predicted its nonoccurrence, in a third. This manipulation of the frequency with which the familiar letter F predicted T was shown to change the function relating probability of a correct peck at the symbol "?" to the number of Fs in the string. This effect may be interpreted as an instance of the phenomenon where an organism''s acquired knowledge changes what it sees.     

Molecular maximizing characterizes choice on Vaughan's (1981) procedure

Pigeons keypecked on a two-key procedure in which their choice ratios during one time period determined the reinforcement rates assigned to each key during the next period (Vaughan, 1981). During each of four phases, which differed in the reinforcement rates they provided for different choice ratios, the duration of these periods was four minutes, duplicating one condition from Vaughan's study. During the other four phases, these periods lasted six seconds. When these periods were long, the results were similar to Vaughan's and appeared compatible with melioration theory. But when these periods were short, the data were consistent with molecular maximizing (see Silberberg & Ziriax, 1982) and were incompatible with melioration, molar maximizing, and matching. In a simulation, stat birds following a molecular-maximizing algorithm responded on the short- and long-period conditions of this experiment. When the time periods lasted four minutes, the results were similar to Vaughan's and to the results of the four-minute conditions of this study; when the time periods lasted six seconds, the choice data were similar to the data from real subjects for the six-second conditions. Thus, a molecular-maximizing response rule generated choice data comparable to those from the short- and long-period conditions of this experiment. These data show that, among extant accounts, choice on the Vaughan procedure is most compatible with molecular maximizing.     

Discriminated interresponse times: role of autoshaped responses.

When discriminated interresponse-time (IRT) procedures have been used to assess preference relations among temporally extended operants, deviations from matching have been obtained. Using a yoked-control procedure, the present study found that key pecking in a discriminated IRT procedure has two sources of strength--that arising from the response-reinforcer contingency that is explicitly arranged, and that arising from a stimulus-reinforcer contingency that is a by-product of the explicitly arranged contingency. The key pecking of all lead birds, and that of 3 of the 4 birds exposed to a yoked autoshaping procedure, was controlled by the keylight that signaled the lead birds' criterion IRTs. Because stimulus control of key pecking by the keylight, whether autoshaped or discriminative, fosters deviations from matching, the discriminated IRT procedure does not provide an appropriate basis for conclusions about preference relations among IRTs.     

Hippocampal stimulation disrupts spatial working memory even 8 h after acquisition

The present experiment used hippocampal stimulation to determine the temporal gradient of consolidation of spatial working memory. Rats were trained to perform a spatial working memory task on a radial maze with 12 arms. Each rat went to the ends of 6 arms to obtain a food reward. After 8 h, the rat chose among all the arms to find the ones not previously chosen (and consequently still having food). During some test sessions, the hippocampus was stimulated electrically either at a current level just high enough to produce an electrophysiological seizure, or at a current level below this seizure threshold. Stimulation occurred at one of five intervals (0 to 8 h) following the completion of the first six choices. During other test sessions, the hippocampus was not stimulated. After seizure stimulation, the number of retroactive errors (returning to arms chosen prior to stimulation) increased at all delay intervals; the number of proactive errors (returning to arms chosen after stimulation) increased only with the delay of 8 h. Subthreshold stimulation had no influence on either type of error. These results indicate that normal hippocampal function is required for the maintenance of spatial information in working memory, and that the time course of consolidation of this information is significantly greater than that seen in other types of memory, or consolidation may not take place at all.     

Resolving discrepant results of the Wheatstone Experiment

Summary Soon after Wheatstone published his results obtained with the twelve earliest stereograms. Brewster disputed the result obtained with one of them. This stereogram consisted of a thick vertical line presented to one eye and a thin vertical and thick inclined line to the other. Wheatstone reported seeing depth with this figure but Brewster did not. We conducted three experiments to explore the possible reason for the disagreement. Experiment 1 indicated that the stereogram produces a variety of perceptions including the depth as reported by Wheatstone and the rivalry as reported by Brewster. Experiment 2 showed that Brewster's procedure of keeping the eyes fixed while viewing the stereogram reduces the proportion of subjects reporting depth. In Experiment 3, the top half and the bottom half of the stereogram were presented in different trials. The top of the stereogram that contains no conflicting cues produced reliable depth, but the bottom that does, did not. It is concluded that the difference in the procedures they used and the nature of the stimulus were responsible for the conflicting results.