Rate and temporal pattern of key pecking under autoshaping and omission schedules of reinforcement

The role of response-reinforcer contiguity on autoshaped key pecking in pigeons was studied by scheduling response-dependent nonreinforcement at the beginning or the end of brief (8-sec) discrete trials. Schedules that permitted chance conjunctions of key pecking and food sustained high rates of responding, whereas those that prevented the occurrence of key peck-food intervals shorter than 4 sec sustained low response rates. In addition, selective reinforcement schedules supported accelerating or decelerating rates of responding within individual trials. These effects were traceable to response-reinforcer (operant), but not stimulus-reinforcer (respondent) factors.     

The role of edges in object recognition by pigeons

In three experiments, we explored how pigeons use edges, corresponding to orientation and depth discontinuities, in visual recognition tasks. In experiment 1, we compared the pigeon's ability to recognize line drawings of four different geons when trained with shaded images. The birds were trained with either a single view or five different views of each object. Because the five training views had markedly different appearances and locations of shaded surfaces, reflectance edges, etc, the pigeons might have been expected to rely more on the orientation and depth discontinuities that were preserved over rotation and in the line drawings. In neither condition, however, was there any transfer from the rendered images to the outline drawings. In experiment 2, some pigeons were trained with line drawings and shaded images of the same objects associated with the same response (consistent condition), whereas other pigeons were trained with a line drawing and a shaded image of two different objects associated with the same response (inconsistent condition). If the pigeons perceived any correspondence between the stimulus types, then birds in the consistent condition should have learned the discrimination more quickly than birds in the inconsistent condition. But, there was no difference in performance between birds in the consistent and inconsistent conditions. In experiment 3, we explored pigeons' processing of edges by comparing their discrimination of shaded images or line drawings of four objects. Once trained, the pigeons were tested with planar rotations of those objects. The pigeons exhibited different patterns of generalization depending on whether they were trained with line drawings or shaded images. The results of these three experiments suggest that pigeons may place greater importance on surface features indicating materials, such as food or water. Such substances do not have definite boundaries cued by edges which are thought to be central to human recognition.     

Transitive responding in hooded crows requires linearly ordered stimuli

Eight crows were taught to discriminate overlapping pairs of visual stimuli (A+ B-, B+ C-, C+ D-, and D+ E-). For 4 birds, the stimuli were colored cards with a circle of the same color on the reverse side whose diameter decreased from A to E (ordered feedback group). These circles were made available for comparison to potentially help the crows order the stimuli along a physical dimension. For the other 4 birds, the circles corresponding to the colored cards had the same diameter (constant feedback group). In later testing, a novel choice pair (BD) was presented. Reinforcement history involving stimuli B and D was controlled so that the reinforcement/nonreinforcement ratios for the latter would be greater than for the former. If, during the BD test, the crows chose between stimuli according to these reinforcement/nonreinforcement ratios, then they should prefer D; if they chose according to the diameter of the feedback stimuli, then they should prefer B. In the ordered feedback group, the crows strongly preferred B over D; in the constant feedback group, the crows' choice did not differ significantly from chance. These results, plus simulations using associative models, suggest that the orderability of the postchoice feedback stimuli is important for crows' transitive responding.     

Evidence for a conceptual account of same-different discrimination learning in the pigeon

We trained pigeons to peck two different buttons in response to 16-iconsame arrays versus 16-icondifferent arrays. In thesame arrays, the icons were all the same as one another, whereas in thedifferent arrays, the icons were all different from one another. In Experiment 1, we upset the spatial regularities of the displays by disarranging the icons—randomly displacing each icon to reduce the degree of perceptual order. The pigeons’ discriminative performance was unaffected by disarranging. In Experiment 2, spatial regularities were disturbed by varying the rotation of the icons within a display. Again, no disruption in discriminative performance was observed. These and other findings suggest that pigeons treat the 16 icons as either the same or different despite changes in the spatial organization or orientation of the icons, thus implicating a conceptual rather than a perceptual process in same—different discrimination.     

The paradox of the question

What is the best question to ask an omniscient being? The question is intriguing; is it also paradoxical? We discuss several versions of what Ned Markosian calls “the paradox of the question” and suggest solutions to each of those puzzles. We then offer some practical advice about what do if you ever have the opportunity to query an omniscient being.     

Effects of training condition on the contribution of specific items to relational processing in baboons (Papio papio)

Relational processing involves learning about the relationship between or among stimuli, transcending the individual stimuli, so that abstract knowledge generalizable to novel situations is acquired. Relational processing has been studied in animals as well as in humans, but little attention has been paid to the contribution of specific items to relational thinking or to the factors that may affect that contribution. This study assessed the intertwined effects of item and relational processing in nonhuman primates. Using a procedure that entailed both expanding and contracting sets of pictorial items, we trained 13 baboons on a two-alternative forced-choice task, in which they had to distinguish horizontal from vertical relational patterns. In Experiment 1, monkeys engaged in item-based processing with a small training set size, and they progressively engaged in relation-based processing as training set size was increased. However, in Experiment 2, overtraining with a small stimulus set promoted the processing of item-based information. These findings underscore similarities in how humans and nonhuman primates process higher-order stimulus relations.