Incentive processes and the peak shift

Intradimensional operant discrimination schedules were employed, which eliminated the covariation of response and reinforcement rates that are found on most operant baselines. In Phase 1, one keylight (S(1)) controlled an increase in pigeons' treadle pressing, relative to another keylight (S(2)), while being correlated with a decrease in frequency of reinforcement. In Phase 2 both treadle pressing and reinforcement increased in the presence of one keylight, relative to the second. In Phase 1 the relatively flat treadle-press generalization gradients peaked at S(1), whereas the peaks of those in Phase 2 were shifted from S(1) in a direction away from S(2). It was postulated that these positive and negative stimulus-reinforcement contingencies influence the likelihood of obtaining peak shift through the operation of a classically conditioned "central motive state." How response-reinforcement and stimulus-reinforcement contingencies might contribute to the development of inhibitory effects of S(2) is discussed. Autoshaped key pecking also was produced by these procedures. During manipulations of stimuli, the gradients obtained for autoshaped key pecking were narrow and sharply peaked at the food-correlated stimulus (S(2)) in Phase 1. This failure to obtain peak shift for an elicited response suggests a difference in discriminative processes operating in classical and instrumental learning.     

A search for symmetry in the conditional discriminations of rhesus monkeys, baboons, and children.

Procedures for generating arbitrary matching-to-sample performances may generate only conditional discriminations. Rational grounds for this distinction are proposed, based on the properties that any equivalence relation must possess. Empirical tests are described for determining whether subjects trained on conditional discriminations are also engaged in true matching to sample. A series of studies than leads to the conclusion that proof of true matching to sample by monkeys, pigeons, or baboons is yet to be provided. Whether the absence of such proof reflects experiential factors or species-defined limitations is not presently clear.     

Responses and pauses: discrimination and a choice catastrophe.

Pigeons produced a stimulus change either by responding or by not responding for a specified time period (by pausing). They then had to choose between two responses to obtain food. One choice was correct if the first component had been completed by a response; the other was correct if the component had been completed by a pause. The pigeons usually chose correctly, thereby indicating that they used their own prior behavior as a discriminative stimulus. Fixed pause requirements did not produce equal first component completions by a response and by a pause. To obtain equality, the pause requirement was titrated as a function of current performance. Titration resulted in equal completions and also produced accurate discrimination. In addition to showing that pigeons discriminated whether they had responded or paused, the data displayed and discontinuous functions predicted by catastrophe theory. Another procedure used forced choice rather than titration to produce equal completions by pausing and responding and also showed accurate discrimination of behavior.     

Attention in the pigeon: testing for excitatory and inhibitory control by the weak elements.

In two experiments, pigeons were trained on a successive discrimination between a color and either a compound S+ or a compound S- consisting of a form superimposed on a second color. Two stimulus control tests followed discrimination training: an attention test in which the form and colors used in training were presented singly and in combination, and then a resistance-to-reinforcement test using the form element of S+ or S- and a novel form. In the attention test, the birds trained with a compound S+ responded most to the S+ compound, less to the S+ color alone, and still less to the S+ form on a dark key. Few responses were made to the negative stimulus, either alone or with the S+ form added. The birds trained with a compound S- pecked most at the S+ color and to a compound of the S+ color with the S- form added. The resistance-to-reinforcement test showed that the birds trained with a compound S+ responded more to the S+ form than to a novel form. However, the birds trained with a compound S- did not reliably respond more to a novel form than to the S- form. These findings suggested that the form element of a compound S+ gains some excitatory control, but the form element of a compound S- does not acquire inhibitory control. The possibility existed that low levels of responding to the S+ form on a dark background in the first experiment were due to use of a darkened key to separate S+ and S- periods during discrimination training. However, the essential findings were the same in a second experiment in which darkening of the chamber separated S+ and S- periods.     

Acquisition of stimulus control while introducing new stimuli in fading.

After establishing discrimination between a red positive stimulus and a green negative stimulus, the lowest intensity colors that restricted all responding to the positive stimulus were determined. Then, two new white lines differing in terms of line orientation were each superimposed on one of the colors and were increased in intensity. Thereafter, the intensity of the colors was decreased and eventually eliminated. Probe stimuli consisting of the lines presented against dark backgrounds were presented before each change of stimulus intensity, and probe responding was used to assess the control acquired by various dimension of the new stimuli during the course of fading. The lines acquired control of responding while they were being introduced, and control was strengthened as the colors were attenuated. Such a locus of acquisition was attributed to the starting intensity of the original controlling stimuli and was explained in terms of stimulus blocking. Finally, using probes while introducing the new stimuli enhanced the acquisition of control by the new stimuli.     

Auditory discrimination: role of time and intensity in the precedence effect.

Rats were trained to respond on a lever adjacent to a sounding speaker (the sound source) when a single click was emitted. A second click (the artificial echo) was presented through a second speaker on the opposite side. In Condition I, the echo (equal in intensity to the source) was delayed from .015 to 32 milliseconds; greater than 75% correct responses were given for delay times between about .040 milliseconds (lower threshold) and 8 milliseconds (upper threshold). In Condition II, the echo (simultaneous with the source) was reduced in intensity relative to the source over a range from 2.5 decibels to 40 decibels; greater than 75% correct responses occurred for intensity reductions greater than 5 decibels. In Condition III, both the intensity and the delay time of the echo were manipulated in a manner analogous to that which would occur under natural conditions; greater than 95% correct responses were given for delay times from 1 to 32 milliseconds. These data indicate that both time and intensity differences are necessary for localization of primary sources, with delay time contributing more at short echo path distances, and intensity differences at long distances.     

Shock as a signal for shock or no-shock: a feature-negative effect in conditioned suppression.

Rats were trained in conditioned suppression discriminations where shock at the beginning of a trial signaled either shock or no-shock at the end of the trial. In the shock-positive condition, shock at the beginning of a presentation of white noise signaled that noise would end with shock; noise that did not begin with shock did not end with shock. In the shock-negative discrimination, shock at the beginning of noise signaled that noise would not end with shock; presentations of noise that did not begin with shock ended with shock. In shock-random training, shock at the beginning of noise did not reliably signal whether the noise presentation would or would not end with shock. Most subjects in shock-negative training quickly developed a differential pattern of suppression on positive (shock reinforced) trials and no suppression on negative (nonreinforced) trials. The shock-positive discrimination was much more difficult to establish and was not acquired by the majority of the rats. This "feature-negative" effect is a clear exception to the general superiority of feature-positive learning commonly observed in discriminations based on a single distinguishing feature. The results are discussed in terms of Pavlovian stimulus-shock contingencies in the shock-positive and shock-negative paradigms, which appear to favor rapid development of the shock-negative discrimination.     

Food delivery as a conditional stimulus: Feature-learning and memory in pigeons

Three experiments investigated the learning and memory of discriminations based on presence versus absence of a pre-trial food delivery. In Experiment 1 half the illuminations of a response key were followed by food regardless of the subject's behavior. In one group an extra food delivery preceded only reinforced trials (feature-positive condition), whereas in a second group it preceded only nonreinforced trials (feature-negative condition). Key pecks and approaches revealed more rapid and superior discrimination learning in the first group. Experiment 2 replicated the results of Experiment 1 but yielded no evidence that greater “unexpectedness” of pretrial food conditions facilitates discriminative performance. In Experiment 3, individual pigeons trained on a conditional discrimination exhibited a within-subject feature-positive superiority. Delay between pretrial and trial stimuli interacted with feature-positive versus feature-negative training in both the between-group (Experiment 2) and within-subject (Experiment 3) procedures: performance was decremented at both short and long delays in the feature-positive condition but was decremented only at longer delays in the feature-negative condition. The feature-positive superiority obtained here is incompatible with explanations based on either the general concept of “perceptual organization” or on the conditional nature of feature-negative discriminations.     

The effects of number of sample stimuli and number of choices in a detection task on measures of discriminability

Six pigeons were trained on a conditional discrimination task involving the discrimination of various intensities of yellow light. The research asked whether stimulus—response discriminability measures between any pair of stimuli would remain constant when a third or fourth sample and reinforced response were added. The numbers of different sample stimuli presented and different responses reinforced were two (Part 1), three (Parts 2 and 4), and four (Part 3). Across conditions within parts, the ratios of reinforcers obtainable for correct responses were varied over at least five levels. In Part 5, the numbers of sample stimuli and reinforced responses were varied among two, three, and four, and the reinforcer ratio between consecutive remaining samples was constant at 2:1. It was found that once a particular response had been reinforced, subjects continued to emit that response when the conditional stimulus for that response was no longer presented. Data analysis using a generalization-based detection model indicated that this model was able to describe the data effectively. Four findings were in accord with the theory. First, estimates of stimulus—response discriminability usually decreased as the arranged physical disparity between the sample stimuli decreased. Second, stimulus—response discriminability measures were independent of response—reinforcer discriminability measures, preserving parameter invariance between these measures. Third, stimulus—response discriminability measures for constant pairs of conditional stimuli did not change systematically as conditional stimulus—response alternatives were added. Fourth, log stimulus—response discriminability values between physically adjacent conditional stimuli summed to values that were not significantly different from estimates of the discriminability values for conditional stimuli that were spaced further apart.     

Psychophysics of remembering

We present a new model of remembering in the context of conditional discrimination. For procedures such as delayed matching to sample, the effect of the sample stimuli at the time of remembering is represented by a pair of Thurstonian (normal) distributions of effective stimulus values. The critical assumption of the model is that, based on prior experience, each effective stimulus value is associated with a ratio of reinforcers obtained for previous correct choices of the comparison stimuli. That ratio determines the choice that is made on the basis of the matching law. The standard deviations of the distributions are assumed to increase with increasing retention-interval duration, and the distance between their means is assumed to be a function of other factors that influence overall difficulty of the discrimination. It is a behavioral model in that choice is determined by its reinforcement history. The model predicts that the biasing effects of the reinforcer differential increase with decreasing discriminability and with increasing retention-interval duration. Data from several conditions using a delayed matching-to-sample procedure with pigeons support the predictions.