Stimulus equivalence and arbitrarily applicable relational responding.

Subjects' responses to nonarbitrary stimulus relations of sameness, oppositeness, or difference were brought under contextual control. In the presence of the SAME context, selecting the same comparison as the sample was reinforced. In the presence of the OPPOSITE context, selecting a comparison as far from the sample as possible on the physical dimension defined by the set of comparisons was reinforced. Given the DIFFERENT context, selecting any comparison other than the sample was reinforced. Subjects were then exposed to arbitrary matching-to-sample training in the presence of these same contextual cues. Some subjects received training using the SAME and OPPOSITE contexts, others received SAME and DIFFERENT, and others received SAME, OPPOSITE, and DIFFERENT. The stimulus networks established allowed testing for a wide variety of derived relations. In two experiments it was shown that derived performances were consistent with relational responding brought to bear by the contextual cues. In contexts relevant to the relation of sameness, stimulus equivalence emerged. Other kinds of relational networks emerged in the other contexts. Arbitrarily applicable relational responding may give rise to a very wide variety of derived stimulus relations. The kinds of performances seen in stimulus equivalence do not appear to be unique.     

Titration of schedule parameters by pigeons

Pigeons were tested in a computer-controlled two-key chamber. A standard (nonchanging) schedule of reinforcement was in force on one key, and an adjusting schedule on the other. The schedules were available concurrently after each reinforcement, but after the first peck on either key (the choice peck), the schedule on the other key was made inoperative. The parameter of the adjusting schedule was decreased when the standard schedule was chosen and increased when the adjusting schedule was chosen. The standard schedule was changed only between sessions. Fixed intervals and fixed ratios were used as standard schedules, and intervals and ratios were used as adjusting schedules. When standard and adjusting schedules were of the same type, median parameters on the adjusting key equalled those of the standard schedules, at four values of each standard schedule. For four of five birds, and for the group median, similar curves could be plotted through the indifference points obtained from a standard ratio with an adjusting interval, and from a standard interval with an adjusting ratio. These points showed consistent individual differences, but they could be predicted by assuming that the median time from the choice peck to reinforcement should be the same on both keys. This is equivalent to treating the schedule as a concurrent chain and assuming that Herrnstein's quantitative law of effect applies.     

Choice and the rate of punishment in concurrent schedules

Rats' responses on two levers were reinforced according to independent random-interval 1.5-min food schedules. In addition, both lever presses were intermittently punished according to several concurrent random-interval random-interval shock schedules. For the left, the scheduled rate of punishment was kept constant according to a random-interval 6-min schedule. For the right, the rate of punishment varied. As the frequency of punishment for the right lever press increased, its rate decreased. The rate of the left punished lever press increased, however, even though its scheduled reinforcement rate and punishment rate remained unchanged.     

Differential sample response schedules in the acquisition of conditional discriminations by pigeons

Pigeons were trained on four matching-to-sample tasks with various schedule requirements in effect on the sample key. Differential sample-schedule requirements (a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rates of 3 sec in the presence of one sample and a fixed-ratio 16 in the presence of the other) produced rapid rates of acquisition that did not differ across tasks. Nondifferential sample-schedule requirements (fixed-ratio 1, fixed-ratio 16 or a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rates of 3 sec in the presence of both samples) produced slower rates of acquisition, which depended on the difficulty of the discriminations between samples and between comparisons. Patterns of stimulus and position preferences were influenced both by the comparison stimuli in each task and by the sample-schedule requirements. Detailed analyses of acquisition revealed frequent instances of complete differential sample control of comparison responding at intermediate levels of overall “accuracy”.     

Matching-based hedonic scaling in the pigeon

Four slightly hungry pigeons chose between pairs of grains in a Findley concurrent choice procedure. For Condition I, choice involved hemp versus buckwheat; for Condition II, wheat versus buckwheat; and for Condition III, hemp versus wheat. In all conditions, frequency of reinforcement was arranged according to concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules. On the assumption that subjects matched their behavior and time distributions to those of reinforcer value, the choice functions obtained in Conditions I and II were transformed to yield estimates of values of hemp and wheat relative to buckwheat. These, in turn, provided predictions about behavior and time allocation in Condition III. In general, the predicted outcomes were close to those actually obtained. The results evidence the effectiveness of matching-based hedonic scales in the prediction of choice between qualitatively different reinforcers.     

Yoked variable-ratio and variable-interval responding in pigeons

Pigeons' key pecks were maintained by variable-ratio or variable-interval schedules of food reinforcement. For pairs of pigeons in one group, variable-ratio reinforcement was arranged for one pigeon's pecks; for the second pigeon, reinforcement was arranged according to a variable-interval schedule yoked to the interreinforcement times produced by the first pigeon. For pairs of pigeons in another group, variable-interval reinforcement was arranged for one pigeon's pecks; for the second pigeon, reinforcement was arranged according to a variable-ratio schedule yoked to the interreinforcement responses produced by the first pigeon. For each pair, the yoking procedure was maintained for four or five consecutive sessions of 50 reinforcements each. In more than three-quarters of the pairs, variable-ratio response rates were higher than variable-interval rates within two sessions; in all cases, the rate difference developed within four sessions.     

Species differences in temporal control of behavior

Temporal control of rats' and pigeons' responding was analyzed and compared in detail on fixed-interval and fixed-time schedules with parameters of 30, 60, and 120 seconds. On fixed-time schedules, rats' responding decreased greatly or ceased, whereas pigeons continued to respond, especially on low schedule values. The running rate of responses (calculated by excluding the postreinforcement pause) was related to the duration of the preceding postreinforcement pause for rats but not for pigeons. Changes in response rate in successive segments of the interval were best described by normal curves. The relationship between midpoints of the normal curves and schedule value was a power function, with an exponent of less than one for pigeons but greater than one for rats. These differences could be explained in terms of a basic difference between the key-peck and lever-press responses, the two being differently affected by the response-eliciting properties of food.     

Short-term memory in the pigeon: delayed-pair-comparison procedures and some results.

A discrete-trials, delayed-pair-comparison procedure was developed to study visual short-term memory for tilted lines. In four experiments, pigeons' responses on left or right keys were reinforced with food depending on whether a comparison stimulus was or was not the same as a standard stimulus presented earlier in the same trial. In Experimental I, recall was an increasing function of the exposure time of the to-be-remembered stimulus and was a decreasing function of the retention interval. In Experiment II, retroactive interference was investigated: recall was poorer after a retention interval during which was presented either a tilted line or contextual stimuli in the form of the illuminated experimental chamber. In Experiment III, a subject was required to engage, throughout the retention interval, in one or the other of two different behaviors, depending on which of two stimuli a subject was to remember. This mnemonic strategy vastly improved recall after 15- and 20-second retention intervals. In Experiment IV, the opposite end of the performance continuum was studied: by combining the effects of a larger stimulus set and the effects of what presumably was an increased memory load, performance was reduced to approximately chance levels after retention intervals shorter than 1 second.     

Behaviors observed during S- in a simple discrimination learning task

Key pecking of pigeons was reinforced with food in the presence of a horizontal line and never reinforced in the presence of a vertical line. Highly stereotyped behaviors, as well as key pecking, were observed and recorded in the presence of both stimuli. Results showed that a high proportion of time spent in the presence of the horizontal line was occupied by key pecking, a high proportion of time in the presence of the vertical line was occupied by stereotyped nonkey-pecking behaviors, and intermediate proportions of time spent in the presence of intermediate stimuli were occupied by each class of behavior during generalization tests. Similar running rates (number of key pecks divided by observed key-pecking time) were obtained in the presence of all stimuli, indicating that changes in time rather than tempo accounted for the changes in overall rates of key pecking. An exception occurred in responding to the horizontal line as differential performance was developing. In addition to an increase in time spent key pecking, increased running rates occurred in seven of eight birds, suggesting that both time allocation and tempo play a role in behavioral contrast of overall rates of key pecking.     

Social learning by following: an analysis

Learning by “following”, probably a common means by which behaviors are socially transmitted from adults to young in many species, was analyzed. Pigeons first learned to eat from a human hand. When the hand then approached an operant key and pecked it, the pigeons followed and quickly learned to do the same, thereby demonstrating social learning. When the hand only led the birds to the area of the key, without demonstrating the key-peck response, the birds learned as rapidly as with a key-peck demonstration. Birds also learned, but less reliably and more slowly, when they could observe the hand's responses but were constrained and unable to follow. “Following” was also shown to engender very rapid learning of a more complex, two-member response chain.