Conditional discrimination performance by pigeons on a response-independent procedure

Pigeons were trained on a differential autoshaping procedure in which both components of two-stimulus sequences predicted delivery or nondelivery of food. All birds acquired the conditional discrimination. When the subjects were exposed to an extinction procedure, the stimuli maintained conditional control as long as the birds continued to peck the key. When a delay interval was imposed between the two components of a stimulus sequence using a titration procedure, the stimuli maintained conditional control up to delay values of 7 to 10 sec. These data are consistent with the view that the controlling stimuli in conditional discrimination situations are compounds of stimulus elements.     

On Keats' generalization of the rasch model

Parameter estimation for Keats generalization of the Rasch model that takes account of guessing behavior is investigated. It is shown that no minimal sufficient statistics for the ability parameters independent of the difficulty parameters exist. Thus Andersen's conditional inference technique for consistent estimation is not applicable to Keats' model. The notion of separability of the parameters is generalized.     

Establishing auditory stimulus control over an eight-member equivalence class via conditional discrimination procedures

Two eight-member equivalence classes of visual stimuli were established during three phases of a training program. In Phase 1, two training arrangements were compared. In one, 3 subjects were taught on different trials to select from a single pair of comparison stimuli (A1, A2) in response to eight sample stimuli that were trained in pairs (B1, B2; C1, C2; D1, D2; E1, E2). In the second arrangement, subjects were taught to select from four pairs of comparisons (B1, B2; C1, C2; D3, D2; E2, E2) in response to two samples (A1, A2). Training with the single pair of comparison stimuli resulted in the development of equivalence relations (B1C1, B2C2, D1B1, D2B2, B1E1, B2E2, C1D1, C2D2, C1E1, C2E2, D1E1, D2E2, and their reciprocals) between the sample stimuli without direct training of these relations. In the other training arrangement, these relations among the comparison stimuli developed in the performance of 1 subject only. In Phase 2, three new pairs of stimuli (F1, F2; G1, G2; H1, H2) were substituted for three of the original pairs (B1, B2; C1, C2; D1, D2) and the training arrangements for the groups were reversed. Following training, the performances that showed equivalence relations on the probes in the first phase also showed equivalence relations in the second phase. If such relations did not develop in the first phase, they did not do so in the second phase. In Phase 3, relations between stimuli across the two previous phases (e.g., B1F1, B2F2, B1G1, B2H2, C1F1, etc.) were investigated. The 4 subjects whose performances showed the development of these relations were taught to select one stimulus from each class (E1 and E2) in response to a verbal label (I1 and I2) and then were tested to see if the verbal label controlled responding to the remaining members of the class (e.g., I1A1, I2A2, I1B1, I2B2, etc.). For 3 subjects, this generalized control occurred; for the 4th, generalization occurred only after verbal training with a second pair of visual stimuli (F1 and F2). In retests several months later, these auditory-visual relations were found to be intact or, if not, were recovered without direct training.     

Emergent simple discrimination established by indirect relation to differential consequences

Three experiments examined a discrimination training sequence that led to emergent simple discrimination in human subjects. The experiments differed primarily in their subject populations. Normally capable adults served in the first experiment, preschool children in the second, and mentally retarded adults in the third. In all experiments, subjects learned a simple simultaneous discrimination: When visual stimuli A1 and A2 were displayed together, reinforcers followed selections of A1, the S+, but not A2, the S-. The subjects also learned a conditional discrimination taught with an arbitrary visual-visual matching-to-sample procedure. Comparisons were two additional visual stimuli, B1 and B2, and samples were A1 and A2. Reinforcers followed selections of B1 in the presence of A1 and of B2 in the presence of A2. After the simple-discrimination and conditional-discrimination baselines had been acquired, B1 and B2 were displayed alone (without a sample) on probe trials. Subjects had never been taught explicitly how to respond to such displays. Nonetheless, they almost always selected B1, which was involved in a conditional relation with A1, the stimulus that served as S+ on the simple-discrimination trials. This outcome suggested the formation of stimulus classes during conditional-discrimination training. Through class formation, B1 and B2 had apparently acquired stimulus functions similar to those shown by A1 and A2 on simple-discrimination trials, thereby leading to emergent selections of B1 on the probes.     

Items bundles

An item bundle is a small group of multiple choice items that share a common reading passage or graph, or a small group of matching items that share distractors. Item bundles are easily identified by paging through a copy of a test. Bundled items may violate the latent conditional independence assumption of unidimensional item response theory (IRT), but such a violation would not typically suggest the existence of a new fundamental human ability to read one specific reading passage or to interpret one specific graph. It is important, therefore, to have theoretical concepts and empirical checks that distinguish between, on the one hand, anticipated violations of latent conditional independence within item bundles, and, on the other hand, violations that cannot be attributed to idiosyncratic features of test format and instead suggest departures from unidimensionalty. To this end, two theorems on unidimensional IRT are extended to describe observable item response distributions when there is conditional independencebetween but not necessarilywithin item bundles.The author is grateful to Ivo Molenaar and the referees for many helpful suggestions, and to D. Thayer for assistance with computing.     

The merger and development of equivalence classes by unreinforced conditional selection of comparison stimuli

Three experiments assessed the likelihood that subjects with histories of equivalence class development would respond conditionally on new discriminations in the absence of differential consequences for responses. In the first two experiments, two groups of subjects with different experimental histories, but whose performances showed four equivalence classes, responded on trials without explicit reinforcement involving samples from two of the classes and comparisons from the other two classes, in a two-choice matching-to-sample format. Subjects consistently selected a particular comparison in the presence of a particular sample. Subsequent tests showed the emergence of equivalence relations between stimuli from classes linked by the unreinforced conditional selections. Subsequently, in Experiment II, the subjects' responses in the conditional selection trials were reinforced if the selection was reversed from that made previously. Although reversed selection was maintained, 2 of the 3 subjects continued to perform on equivalence relation trials according to their original unreinforced selections. In the third experiment, these 2 subjects responded on a series of conditional discriminations involving three new pairs of sample stimuli and one new pair of comparison stimuli. No explicit reinforcement followed responses on any trial in this experiment. Subsequent tests for equivalence between sample stimuli revealed the development of two equivalence classes.     

Transfer of a conditional ordering response through conditional equivalence classes

Eight adult humans were taught conditional discriminations in a matching-to-sample format that led to the formation of two four-member equivalence classes. When subjects were taught to select one comparison stimulus from each class in a set order, they then ordered all other members of the equivalence classes without explicit training. When the ordering response itself was brought under conditional control, conditional sequencing also transferred to all other members of the two equivalence classes. When the conditional discriminations in the matching-to-sample task were brought under higher order conditional control, the eight stimulus members were arranged into four conditional equivalence classes. Both ordering and conditional ordering transferred to all members of the four conditional equivalence classes; for some subjects this occurred without a typical test for equivalence. One hundred twenty untrained sequences emerged from eight trained sequences for all subjects. Transfer of functions through equivalence classes may contribute to a behavior-analytic approach to semantics and generative grammar.     

A note on the measurement of conditional discrimination.

An analysis of some extreme forms of stimulus control that a simple conditional-discrimination procedure can generate leads to the conclusion that accuracy does not provide an orderly scale of measurement. Dependence on accuracy to evaluate a conditional discrimination, particularly at intermediate levels of accuracy, can generate erroneous conclusions about the extent to which the controlling relations are those specified by the experimenter.     

Short-term memory in the rhesus monkey: A behavioral analysis of delayed-response performance

This study obtained quantitative data on the bodily orientations of rhesus monkeys in a delayed-response task and determined whether such orientations mediate the correct response in a choice trial. The basic task was a two-key chain schedule with the key leading to food signaled in the initial component. During the subsequent delay interval, the signal was removed, but it was necessary that one of the keys be pressed to advance the schedule to the terminal choice component. The position of the key pressed thus indicated orientation during the delay interval. When the monkeys had free access to the left and right keys, they tended to press the key leading to food throughout the chain schedule components and received food on more than 85% of the trials, even when the delay was extended to 20 seconds. However, when orientation toward the food key was disrupted by forcing the monkeys to press an extraneous center key during the delay, choice performance deteriorated. Requiring the center key presses early, rather than late, in the delay component had a strong disruptive effect. The relation of the results to the mediating coding-response hypothesis is discussed.