An infrared system for the detection of a pigeon''s pecks at alphanumeric characters on a TV screen: the dependency of letter detection on the predictability of one letter by another.

Three pigeons pecked at letters of the alphabet and at the symbol "?" displayed on a computer-driven cathode ray screen. A 4 by 4 matrix of infrared emitting and detecting diodes and associated circuitry identified the location of a pigeon''s responses to the screen. Responses at the target letter T were probabilistically reinforced with food whenever T appeared in a string of three letters in the middle of the screen. Responses at the symbol "?" appearing below this string were probabilistically reinforced whenever T did not appear. The letter F anywhere in the three-character string either strongly predicted the occurrence of the target letter T, in two conditions, or predicted its nonoccurrence, in a third. This manipulation of the frequency with which the familiar letter F predicted T was shown to change the function relating probability of a correct peck at the symbol "?" to the number of Fs in the string. This effect may be interpreted as an instance of the phenomenon where an organism''s acquired knowledge changes what it sees.     

Auditory word discriminations in the pigeon.

Four pigeons were trained on a multiple variable-interval 30-s extinction schedule with various pairs of spoken English words presented as the discriminative stimuli. The birds typically produced discrimination indices of 70% to 90% accuracy. Discrimination accuracy was improved by shortening the interval between auditory stimulus presentations, and by increasing the number of syllables in the words.     

Transfer of matching-to-figure samples in the pigeon

Three pigeons were trained on a modified six-key matching-to-sample procedure. The third peck on the figure-sample key (which presented a bird, hand, face, beetle, rabbit, fish, flower, or red hue, as the sample) lighted only one comparison key. Every three additional pecks on the sample lighted another comparison key, up to a maximum of five keys. Pecks on keys of matching figures produced grain. Pecks on nonmatching keys (mismatches) turned off all lights on the comparison keys and repeated the trial. Three figures were used during acquisition. The birds learned to peck each sample until the matching comparison stimulus appeared on one of three comparison stimulus keys, and then to peck that key. Later, five novel stimuli, employed as both sample and comparison stimuli, and two additional matching keys were added. Each bird showed matching transfer to the novel samples. The data suggest that the birds may have learned the concept of figure matching rather than a series of two-component chains or discrete five-key discriminations.     

Predicting and scaling hens' preferences for topographically different responses

Six hens were exposed to several concurrent (second-order) variable-interval schedules in which the response requirements on the alternatives were varied. The response requirements were one key peck versus five key pecks, one key peck versus one door push, and five key pecks versus one door push. Response- and time-allocation ratios undermatched the obtained reinforcement ratios but were well described by the generalized matching law. Time and response bias estimates from two pairs of response requirements were used to predict bias in the third pairing. The predicted values were close to those obtained; this result supports the notion that both numerically and topographically different responses act as constant sources of bias within the generalized matching law. The differences between the response and time biases could be accounted for by the different times needed to complete each response requirement. The results also suggest that the door push is a useful operant for research with domestic hens.     

Positive reinforcement and the elimination of reinforced responses

Key pecking was maintained on a fixed-interval schedule while either a differential-reinforcement-of-not-responding or a fixed-time schedule was imposed simultaneously. The lower the time parameter of the not-responding schedule, the lower was the response rate. Similar effects occurred with the fixed-time schedule, if the pigeons had experience with reinforcement for not responding. Otherwise the effects were less orderly, to the extent that rate could reach maximum with the lowest-valued fixed-time schedule. The not-responding and the response-independent schedules had similar effects on rate in experienced pigeons only when the time parameter or nominal frequency of food presentation was considered. When considered in terms of obtained frequency of food presentation, reinforcement of not responding produced larger decrements in rate than did the fixed-time schedule.     

Behavioral contrast as a function of the temporal location of reinforcement

Pigeons were trained on a multiple variable-interval variable-interval schedule of reinforcement. One component was then changed to a variation of a fixed-interval schedule in which the same rate of reinforcement was obtained as previously but the location of the reinforcer was fixed within the component. The effects of different temporal locations were compared. An increase in response rate for the unchanged variable-interval component (behavioral contrast) occurred when the reinforcer was located in the middle or at the end of the FI component, but response suppression occurred when it was located at the beginning of the component. The pattern of results cannot be explained by any previous theories of contrast. The overall response rates, and the pattern of local rates within the components, were consistent with the hypothesis that the major determinant of the contrast effect was the transition to a lower reinforcement rate following the unchanged component.     

IRT-stimulus contingencies in chained schedules: implications for the concept of conditioned reinforcement

Two experiments with pigeons investigated the effects of contingencies between interresponse times (IRTs) and the transitions between the components of 2- and 4-component chained schedules (Experiments 1 and 2, respectively). The probability of component transitions varied directly with the most recent (Lag 0) IRT in some experimental conditions and with the 4th (Lag 4) IRT preceding the most recent one in others. Mean component durations were constant across conditions, so the reinforcing effect of stimulus change was dissociated from that of delay to food. IRTs were longer in the Lag-0 than in the Lag-4 conditions of both experiments, thus demonstrating that stimulus change functioned as a reinforcer. In the Lag-0 conditions of Experiment 2, the Component-1 IRTs increased more than the Component-2 IRTs, which in turn increased more than the Component-3 IRTs. This finding runs counter to the conditioned-positive-reinforcement account of chained-schedule responding, which holds that the reinforcing effect of stimulus change should vary in strength as an inverse function of the delay to the unconditioned reinforcer at the end of the chain because conditioned reinforcement is due to first- or higher-order classical conditioning. Therefore, we present other possible explanations for this effect.     

Elicited responding to signals for reinforcement: the effects of overall versus local changes in reinforcement probability

Pigeons were studied on a three-component multiple schedule where all reinforcement was independent of responding. Two components were cued by different keylights and were associated with different rates of reinforcement. The third was always a no-key period associated with extinction. After a few sessions, pecking was elicited by the keylights signalling the reinforcement and continued to be maintained indefinitely. The duration and sequence of the three components were varied to determine if the primary controlling variable was differences in the overall probability of reinforcement, or if it was the immediate change in reinforcement signalled by the onset and/or offset of the stimulus. Both variables were found to control behavior. When 30-sec components were used, the primary controlling variable was the overall probability of reinforcement, but when 3-min components were used, overall probability had little effect. Control by local changes in reinforcement also occurred, although the type of local control varied both across subjects and experimental conditions. Some behaviors were controlled more by the change in reinforcement signalled by the onset of the stimulus, while others were controlled more by the change signalled by the offset of the stimulus.     

Stimulus control of the pigeon's ability to peck a moving target.

Two pigeons were trained to peck whichever of eight keys displayed a white field (SD). The other seven keys displayed a white "X" on a black background (S delta). Each peck to SD produced three-second access to grain, a three-second intertrial interval (ITI), and the next trial. Pecks to S delta produced a three-second timeout (TO) and the same trial. During later sessions the key displaying SD changed every t seconds (t = 3, 2, 1, .5, and .25 sec), requiring the birds to track the position of the SD. Pecks on a ninth key increased t. Several sessions employed novel stimuli to ascertain the controlling stimulus dimensions. Both birds made few errors acquiring the original discrimination. During the tracking sessions, both birds made few errors when t = .5 sec. Only one reliably lengthened t. Data from sessions with novel stimuli indicate that color and form were important aspects of SD and S delta respectively; movement contributed to the final performance.     

Constituents of response rates

Response rate and the proportion of time pigeons allocated to a key-pecking activity were measured on several basic types of reinforcement schedules. Reinforcement frequency was varied within each type of basic schedule, and the effects on two constituents of response rate were noted. Propensity, the proportion of time the birds spent on a platform in front of the key, showed very consistent effects as reinforcement frequency varied: in general, it decreased when reinforcement frequency markedly decreased and it increased when reinforcement frequency increased. Speed, key pecks per unit of time spent on the platform, showed inconsistent effects when reinforcement frequency varied. Consequently, response rate showed less consistent effects than did propensity. Cumulative response records demonstrated the existence of several different types of transitions or boundary states between the key-pecking activity and other activities. The types of transitions that occurred between activities depended on both the type of reinforcement schedule and the frequency of reinforcement. The propensity data support the position that general laws of behavior can be based on temporal measures of behavior. The speed data suggest that, if a complete assessment of the dynamic properties of behavior is to be achieved, measures of behavior must incorporate the structural variations in the operant unit.