The autoshaping procedure as a residual block clock

In the first experiment, 4 pigeons were each presented with a recurring sequence of four key colors followed by the delivery of grain (block clock). Once the rate of pecking had stabilized, three of the colors were replaced, during different series of sessions, by a darkening of the key. The rate of pecking was reduced within those segments of the interval between deliveries of food during which the key was dark; when the key was dark during the final portion of the interval, rates were reduced throughout the entire interval. In the second experiment, 3 new pigeons were exposed to a different sequence of colors, and the final stimulus was replaced in successive conditions by a novel color, a darkened key, and a restoration of the original color. The data indicated that darkening the key had a more severe, more extensive, and more persistent effect than did a mere change in color. These results suggest that it may be fruitful to conceptualize the autoshaping procedure as a special version of the block clock in which pecking is suppressed throughout the greater part of the interval by darkening the key. In the final condition, the same stimulus appeared in each of the last three portions of the interval. The rate of pecking was lower during the last two portions than when distinctive colors were presented, with the peak rate now appearing in the fifth of seven equal temporal components.     

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.     

The effect of negative stimulus presentations on observing-response rates

Theories of observing differ in predicting whether or not a signal for absence of reinforcement (S−) is capable of reinforcing observing responses. Experiments in which S− was first removed from and then restored to the procedure have yielded mixed results. The present experiments suggest that failure to control for the direct effect of presenting S− may have been responsible. Pigeons and operant procedures were used. Experiment 1 showed that presentations of S−, even when not contingent on observing, can raise the rate of an observing response that was reinforced only by presentations of a signal (S+) that accompanied a schedule of food delivery. Experiment 2 showed that this effect resulted from bursts of responding that followed offsets of S−. Experiment 3 showed that, when the presence of S− was held constant, lower rates occurred when S− was dependent on, rather than independent of, observing. These results support theories that characterize S− as incapable of reinforcing observing responses.     

Variable-interval escape from stimuli accompanied by shocks

Individual performances of three rats were examined under a procedure in which steady rates of bar pressing were maintained by conditioned aversive stimulation. Originally neutral visual and auditory stimuli were accompanied by widely and irregularly spaced pulses of shock; they were terminated on a variable-interval schedule by pressing a bar. The contingencies between behavior and shock were also duplicated in a control procedure in which no visual or auditory stimuli were provided. Pressing observed under the control procedure was attributed to differences in the aversiveness of pressing and nonpressing behavior engendered by differences in the incidence of shock following the two classes of behavior. Increased rates with visual and auditory stimuli were attributed to termination of conditioned aversive stimulation. Control rates declined more rapidly than did experimental rates as the mean interval between successive shocks was lengthened; both rates tended to decline when less than 60 sec was allowed as time out from shocks following the successful response. In the control procedure, discrimination between the continuation and discontinuation of the shock series, as measured by relative rates, depended on the relative length of the interval between shocks and the time-out period. Regular warm-up accelerations in rate were noted following an initial delay in responding at the beginning of each session. The length of time required for the warm-up depended on the length of the mean interval between shocks, indicating that exposure to a certain amount of shock was required to establish a supporting state for the observed performance.     

The acquisition of observing.

Pigeons were exposed to stimuli correlated with the presence or absence of a variable-interval 60-second schedule of reinforcement only while they depressed a crossbar or "perch." In the first experiment, the stimuli were different tilts of a line displayed on the key. When the difference in brightness between the line and the background (salience) was maximal, seven of eight birds acquired the discrimination, but when the difference was reduced by 50%, only one succeeded. In the second experiment, wavelength of chamber illumination served as the relevant dimension. Neither experiment showed a large effect attributable to the magnitude of the difference (disparity) between the positive and the negative stimulus. Individual differences in time spent observing were positively correlated with level of discrimination in the presence of the stimuli. All birds produced the positive stimulus for a greater proportion of the available time than they did the negative stimulus. This may be the mechanism that provides selective reinforcement of observing. Finally, the formation of a discrimination was analyzed in terms of changes in the proportion of time spent in contact with the discriminative stimuli.     

Control of avoidance by a response-produced stimulus

Three pigeons were trained to press a foot pedal to postpone electric shock. The safety signal was a tone of 1000 Hz, which sounded for 5 sec following each press; silence therefore served as a warning signal. After the performance approached asymptote, test sessions were interspersed among the training sessions. Following a warm up, the shock was omitted (extinction), and no tone or a tone of 250, 500, 1000, 2000, or 4000 Hz was presented following each press for the remainder of the session. Gradients of generalization plotted in terms of the number of times the tone was produced on each test peaked at 1000 Hz, indicating that the performance was controlled by the frequency. Since this dimension is orthogonal to absence of tone, the gradient cannot be attributed to differences in the magnitude of change in the warning signal. It was concluded that response-produced stimuli reinforce avoidance behavior.     

Punishment of observing by the negative discriminative stimulus

To determine the effect of a negative discriminative stimulus on the response producing it, two pigeons were each studied in a three-key conditioning chamber. During alternating periods of unpredictable duration, pecking the center (food) key either was reinforced with grain on a variable-interval schedule or was never reinforced. On equal but independent variable-interval schedules, pecking either of the side (observing) keys changed the color of all keys for 30 sec from yellow to either green or red. When the schedule on the center key was variable-interval reinforcement, the color was green (positive discriminative stimulus); when no reinforcements were scheduled, the color was red (negative discriminative stimulus). Since pecking the side keys did not affect grain deliveries, changes in the rate of pecking could not be ascribed to changes in the frequency of primary reinforcement. In subsequent sessions, red was withheld as one of the possible consequences of pecking a given side key. When red was omitted, the rate on that key increased, and when red was restored, the rate decreased. It was concluded that red illumination of the keys, the negative discriminative stimulus, had a suppressive effect on the response that produced it.