Discrimination of temporal relations by pigeons

In four experiments, pigeons were tested on a duration comparison task involving the successive presentation of two visual stimuli that varied in duration from trial to trial. Following presentation of the durations, two choice keys were lit, and reinforcement for choices was based on the temporal relation between duration of the pair. In Experiment 1, the range of durations was varied over conditions. Responding changed as an orderly function of the ratio of the two durations. There was a decrease in discrimination accuracy as average duration increased over condition but no difference in accuracy between shorter and longer problems within a duration range. There was no systematic response bias over conditions for all problems within a range, but there was a bias to report the second duration longer than the first for "long" problems within a range. In Experiment 2, the pigeons were transferred from a task involving spatially differentiated choices to one involving hue-differentiated choices. Performance was similar to that of the spatial procedure of Experiment 1. Additional analyses revealed that although information provided by a single duration of the pair was sometimes predictive of the temporal relation between pair members, responding was also based on the relation and comparison of both durations. In Experiment 3, the pigeons were exposed to a single duration range that included many durations from the four ranges of Experiment 1. Discrimination accuracy was comparable in the fourth and longest category. Manipulation of absolute reinforcement rate in Experiment 4 resulted in no chang in discrimination accuracy, suggesting that the decline in accuracy over conditions of Experiment 1 could not be attributed to decreases in reinforcement rate that accompanied lengthier durations. The results are discussed in terms of theories of animal timing, with Staddon's (1983, 1984) temporal perspective model providing the most systematic account of all aspects of performance.