首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
When pigeons are trained on a discrete-trial simultaneous discrimination, some of the value associated with the positive stimulus appears to transfer to the negative stimulus (Zentall & Sherburne, 1994). Pigeons preferred a negative stimulus that had been discriminated from an always-positive stimulus (S+) over a negative stimulus that had been discriminated from a sometimes-positive stimulus (S±). A very different finding (suggestive of transitivity of preference or contrast) was reported by Belke (1992). On concurrent probe tests of stimuli associated with equal variable interval (VI) schedules but originally trained in alternative concurrent pairs (one with a richer schedule, the other with a poorer schedule—VI 20 sec vs. VI 40 sec and VI 40 sec vs. VI 80 sec), the stimulus originally paired with the poorer schedule was preferred. But Belke’s results may have been obtained because the pigeons had been trained to peck the VI 40 sec paired with the poorer schedule and they had been trained not to peck the VI 40 sec paired with the richer schedule. In the present experiment, we avoided this bias by training pigeons on two concurrent schedules in which the tested stimuli both had been associated with the poorer schedule of the pair [A(VI 20 sec) vs. B(VI 80 sec) and C(VI 40 sec) vs. D(VI 80 sec)]. Evidence for value transfer was demonstrated when on probe trials pigeons preferred B over D.  相似文献   

2.
Pigeons were trained to choose between colored lights (A, B, C, and D), first in a two-pair ambiguouscue problem (A+B?, B+C?), and then, with all colors nondifferentially reinforced, in a three-pair loop problem (A+B?, B+C?, C+A?) followed by a four-pair loop problem (A+B?, B+D?, D+C?, C+A?). Systematic efforts were made to simulate the data with a variety of models incorporating one or another of three conceptions of stimulus compounding prominent in the literature on compound conditioning. One conception is that the components of a compound stimulus are altered by interaction; the second is that they are not altered, but only supplemented with a new (compound-unique) component generated in the interaction; and the third is that the components entirely disappear in a configurational transformation. The ambiguous-cue data could be simulated accurately with each of the models, but the loop data with none of them. A convincing explanation of performance in loop problems remains to be found.  相似文献   

3.
Dorrance, Kaiser, and Zentall (1998) trained pigeons on two concurrent simultaneous discriminations (A+B?; C+D?), with interspersed single-stimulus trials in which responding to the two positive discriminanda was differentially reinforced (A+; C±). In each of four separate experiments, the birds showed a preference for stimulus B over stimulus D. Dorrance et al. concluded that the results of these experiments were best described in terms of value transfer theory (VTT; Fersen, Wynne, Delius, & Staddon, 1991). They reject the possibility that the results of these experiments might have been caused by differential nonreinforced experience with the test stimuli (B and D) on the basis of correlational analyses within each experiment. However, differences between experiments in choice of B over D are well predicted by differences in their history of reinforcement. Previous findings that were thought to favor VTT are also entirely consistent with a simpler associative analysis.  相似文献   

4.
A dissociation between the effect of reinforcer type and response strength on the force of the pigeon’s keypeck response was shown in three experiments. In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained to peck two conditioned stimuli, one paired with water and another paired with grain. The pigeons made more forceful pecks for grain than for water and also showed a tendency, albeit an unreliable one, to respond on a higher percentage of food trials than water trials. In Experiment 2, the pigeons from Experiment 1 were satiated with either food or water and were then presented with the two conditioned stimuli in an extinction test. It was found that, regardless of the drive state, the pigeons made more forceful pecks to the stimulus that predicted food than to the stimulus that predicted water. In the thirsty group, however, this difference in force was not accompanied by a difference in the percentage of trials with a response. In Experiment 3, pigeons trained with a single reinforcer pecked more often on instrumentally reinforced trials than on Pavlovian conditioning trials, but there was no difference in the force of the pecks. Taken together, these results imply that differences in response strength cannot account for the difference between the force of food- and water-reinforced pecks. Instead, stimulus-substitution theory may provide the best account of the topography of the two types of pecks.  相似文献   

5.
In four experiments, rats were trained on different patterning discriminations before being tested with compounds composed of novel combinations of the trained stimuli. In Experiment 1, rats were trained on a negative-patterning schedule (A+ B+ AB-) intermixed with reinforced presentations of a second compound (CD+). On a subsequent test, the rats responded more to two novel compounds, AC and BD, than to A and B, but less than to CD. In Experiment 2, rats were trained on two concurrent negative-patterning discriminations (A+ B+ AB-, C+ D+ CD-). On test, they responded more to AC and BD than to AB and CD, but less than to the single stimuli. In Experiment 3, rats were trained on two concurrent positive-patterning discriminations (A-B- AB+, C- D- CD+). On test, their response rates to AC and BD were not different from the response rates to the trained compounds (AB and CD). Finally, in Experiment 4, rats were trained on a positive- and negative-patterning discrimination concurrently. Once again, on test, response rates to AC and BD were not different from responding on reinforced trials of the trained discriminations (A+, B+, and CD+). We discuss the implications of these findings for elemental and configural models of stimulus representation.  相似文献   

6.
During simultaneous discrimination training, there is evidence that some of the value of the S+ transfers to the S?. When the value of the S+ is altered outside the context of the simultaneous discrimination, two very different predictions are made concerning its effect on its S?, depending on whether one views the S+ as an occasion setter or as a stimulus capable of transferring value. In four experiments, pigeons were trained with two similar simultaneous discriminations, A+B? and C+D?, and two single-stimulus trial types, A and C, (in which A always had greater nominal value than C). According to value transfer theory, on test trials, B should always be preferred over D, because B and D should be affected by the net values of A and C, respectively. According to an occasion setting account, however, D should be preferred over B because the presence of D signals a higher probability of reinforcement for responding to C than when C is alone, and/or the presence of B signals a lower probability of reinforcement for responding to A than when A is alone. In all four experiments, the pigeons preferred B over D, a result consistent with value transfer theory. Thus, an S? can acquire value from an S+ even when that value is conditioned in a “context” different from that of the simultaneous discrimination.  相似文献   

7.
The relationship between the duration of stimuli and their conditioned reinforcing effect was investigated using a learning-tests procedure. In Experiment 1, stimuli were the same duration on training (stimulus → reward) and test (choice response → stimulus). Ten- and 30-sec stimuli provided effective differential conditioned reinforcement but 3-sec stimuli did not. In Experiment 2, different pigeons had each combination of the 3- and 30-sec stimuli on training and test trials. Evidence of conditioned reinforcement was obtained only for the birds with 30-sec stimuli on both training and test. The results were interpreted as indicating that stimuli become effective conditioned reinforcers on test trials only when their duration exceeds the duration of differential short-term memory cues resulting from a difference in the events that precede them on training and test trials.  相似文献   

8.
Prior research has indicated that pigeons do not prefer an alternative that provides a sample (for matching to sample) over an alternative that does not provide a sample (i.e., there is no indication of which comparison stimulus is correct). However, Zentall and Stagner (Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes 36:506?C509, 2010) showed that when delay of reinforcement was controlled, pigeons had a strong preference for matching over pseudomatching (i.e., there was a sample, but it did not indicate which comparison stimulus was correct). Experiment 1 of the present study replicated and extended the results of the Zentall and Stagner (Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes 36:506?C509, 2010) study by including an identity relation between the sample and one of the comparison stimuli in both the matching and pseudomatching tasks. In Experiment 2, in which we asked whether the pigeons would still prefer matching if we equated the two tasks for probability of reinforcement, we found no systematic preference for matching over pseudomatching. Thus, it appears that in the absence of differential reinforcement, the information provided by a sample that signals which of the two comparison stimuli is correct is insufficient to produce a preference for that alternative.  相似文献   

9.
When pigeons are given a choice between an initial-link alternative that results in either a terminal-link stimulus correlated with 100% reinforcement or a stimulus correlated with 0% reinforcement (overall 50% reinforcement) and another initial-link alternative that always results in a terminal-link stimulus correlated with 100% reinforcement, some pigeons show a preference for the initial-link alternative correlated with 50% reinforcement. Using this procedure, in Experiment 1, we found a relatively modest preference for 100% over 50% reinforcement. In Experiment 2, we decreased the reinforcement density for the second initial-link alternative to 75% and found a significant preference for the 50% reinforcement initial-link alternative. It may be that this “maladaptive” behavior results from a positive contrast between the expectation of reinforcement correlated with the 50% reinforcement initial-link alternative and the terminal-link stimulus correlated with 100% reinforcement. But apparently, the complementary negative contrast does not develop between the expectation of reinforcement correlated with the 50% reinforcement initial-link alternative and the terminal-link stimulus correlated with 0% reinforcement that often follow. Such paradoxical choice may account for certain human appetitive risk-taking behavior (e.g., gambling) as well.  相似文献   

10.
The present research tested the generality of the “work ethic“ effect described by Clement, Feltus, Kaiser, and Zentall (2000). In Experiment 1, we trained 10 pigeons on a pair of either simultaneous or successive discriminations. One discrimination followed a high-effort requirement (20 pecks to the center key) and the other followed a low-effort requirement (1 peck). Contrary to Clement et al.’s results, we found that preferences between the S+ and S− stimuli in transfer tests depended on the event that initiated the trial: Pigeons preferred the stimulus from the baseline discrimination whose initiating event was most dissimilar from that preceding the test trial. Preferences were similar but less extreme in the successive condition. In Experiment 2, we investigated whether test preferences depended on the amount of training. A total of 12 pigeons were trained on a pair of simultaneous discriminations, except that test sessions were scheduled after every three baseline sessions. Preferences increased across test sessions but were similar to those in Experiment 1. Together with Vasconcelos, Urcuioli, and Lionello-DeNolf (2007a), our study represents a second failure to replicate Clement et al.’s work ethic effect. The finding that preference depends on the event that initiates the test trial suggests that choice probes may not provide unambiguous assessments of stimulus value.  相似文献   

11.
We report the first successful demonstration of a simultaneous, two-itemsame-different (S/D) discrimination by 6 pigeons, in which nonpictorial color and shape stimuli were used. This study was conducted because the majority of recently successful demonstrations of S/D discrimination in pigeons have employed displays with more than two items. Two pairs of stimulus items were simultaneously presented on a touch screen equipped computer monitor. Pigeons were reinforced for consistently pecking at either thesame (i.e., identical) or thedifferent (i.e., nonidentical) pair of items. These pairs were created from combinations of simple colored shapes drawn from a pool of six colors and six shapes. After acquiring the discrimination with item pairs that differed redundantly in both the shape and the color dimensions, the pigeons were tested for transfer to items that varied in only one of these dimensions. Although both dimensions contributed to the discrimination, greater control was exhibited by the color dimension. Most important, the discrimination transferred in tests with novel colored, shaped, and sized items, suggesting that the mechanisms involved were not stimulus specific but were more generalized in nature. These results suggest that the capacity to judge S/D relations is present in pigeons even when only two stimuli are used to implement this contrast.  相似文献   

12.
In two autoshaping experiments, pigeons received training of several modulators with each of two target excitors. Experiment 1 used a conditioned-facilitation (A?/XA+) procedure, and Experiment 2 used a conditioned-inhibition (A+/XA?) procedure. In the first procedure, the X modulators promoted responding to A, whereas in the second they depressed responding to A. Pairs of the X modulators were then presented in conjunction with a novel target stimulus, B. The ability of those pairs to modulate responding to B was greater when the modulators in a pair had both been trained with the same A stimulus rather than with different A stimuli. That suggests an involvement of the original training targets in the transfer of modulators to a novel target.  相似文献   

13.
The aim of this study was to delineate the minimal conditions for extinction of Pavlovian modulation in humans. Previous experiments at our lab showed that, after X ? A+/A?C acquisition training, X?C trials did not extinguish differential X ? A+/A?C responding, while X ? A?C trials did. Additionally, X ? A?C extinction training seemed only to extinguish differential X ? A+/A?C responding, while leaving differential responding on a concurrently trained Y ? B+/B?C discrimination intact. It thus seemed that the X ? A+/A?C discrimination can only be extinguished by X ? A?C extinction trials. (Rescorla, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 12, 16?C24, 1986), on the other hand, found that the minimal conditions for extinction were broader in pigeons: Namely, he found that an acquired X ? A+/A?C discrimination could be extinguished by presenting the original feature X in combination with a different target (B) that was minimally trained as an exciter. We thus wanted to examine whether this was also the case in humans. We found that nonreinforced X ? B?C presentations did not abolish discriminative X ? A/A responding when target B was a nonreinforced stimulus. Nonreinforced X ? B?C trials did extinguish the X ? A+/A?C discrimination when target B had previously been trained as a target for modulation (X ? B+/B?C or Y ? B+/B?C training) or as a reinforced exciter (B+). Our results thusf parallel and extend those in nonhuman animals (Rescorla, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 12, 16?C24, 1986).  相似文献   

14.
Pigeons were given successive discrimination training in which pecking during a choice period when the key was white was either reinforced or not, depending upon the prior presence or absence of a discriminative stimulus, which was a two-element serial compound. The compound consisted of a keylight and food, with food presented second or first in a forward or backward pairing for different groups of pigeons. In Experiment 1, the sequence was an S+ indicating reinforced trials, while in Experiment 2, the sequence was an S? indicating nonreinforced trials. Following acquisition of discriminated operant behavior, a sequence generalization test was administered during which all possible orders of the two stimuli were presented on test trials prior to the onset of the choice period. The results showed that food overshadowed stimulus control by the color of the light on the key on the sequence-generalization test, independently of whether food was presented first or second during training and independently of whether food was associated with reinforcement or nonreinforcement. The similarity of results for the two experiments suggests that overshadowing occurs independently of whether the compound is a discriminative stimulus for reinforcement or nonreinforcement. Simultaneous presentation of elements of a compound stimulus is not necessary for overshadowing because the phenomenon was captured with sequentially presented stimuli.  相似文献   

15.
Four experiments were performed to explore modulatory transfer after serial feature-ambiguous (F-A) discrimination (X→A+, A?, X→B?, B+) in Pavlovian keypeck conditioning (autoshaping) with pigeons. Diffuse features were used in the first three experiments, and no modulatory transfer was found: (1) There was no modulatory transfer between two concurrently trained F-A tasks; (2) modulatory transfer to conditioned and then extinguished stimuli was not observed; and (3) responding to the targets (A and B) after their contingencies were reversed was not affected by presentation of their original feature stimulus (X). Transfer between two serial F-A tasks was obtained in the last experiment, in which keylights were used as features, but other evidence indicated that this was due to stimulus generalization between the features. Together, the results strongly suggest that specific target-food occasion setting or configural learning is the underlying mechanism of F-A discrimination.  相似文献   

16.
Control of pigeons’ keypecking by conditionalities in the spatial arrangement of two element stimuli (designated A and B) was investigated. In Experiment 1, reinforcement for keypecking was made conditional upon the left-right location of A and B: Reinforcement was available when A was on the left and B was on the right (AB), but not on BA, AA, or BB trials. The pigeons successfully discriminated the rewarded AB configuration, but only after a stage in which a particular element in a particular location (e.g., A on left) primarily controlled pecking. Experiments 2 and 3 systematically replicated these findings and included controls to discount discrimination of the AB compound on the basis of the temporal order (e.g., A followed by B) rather than the spatial configuration of the elements. During a generalization test in Experiment 4, the elements were presented singly either in the left (AX, BX) or right (XA, XB) positions. As would be expected had the animals learned “A on the left, B on the right is rewarded,” responding on AX trials exceeded that on XA trials, and responding on XB trials exceeded that on BX trials.  相似文献   

17.
Following simultaneous discrimination training with pigeons, in which responding to the S−was reinforced on half of the trials and responding to the S− was never reinforced, we examined the effect on the S− of presenting the S− by itself and the effect on the S+ of presenting the S− by itself (relative to an S− or an S− for which there had been no single-stimulus presentations). For Group A−, responding to the S− presented by itself was always reinforced, whereas for Group A−, such responding was extinguished. For Group B−, responding to the S− presented by itself was always reinforced, whereas for Group B+, responding was extinguished. Although both Group A+ and Group A−tended to avoid their associated S− (relative to a control S−), Group A+ avoided its associated S− less than did Group A−. In contrast, although for Group B−, presentation of the S− alone increased the pigeons’ preference for its associated S−(relative to a control S+), for Group B−, presentation of the S−alone had little effect on its preference for its associated S+. These results suggest that presentation of one stimulus from a simultaneous discrimination has two independent and sometimes opposite effects on the other discriminative stimulus. First, it reduces the strength of within-event conditioning between the S+ and the S−, and second, if the value of the singly presented stimulus has increased, some of its newly acquired value will transfer retroactively to the stimulus with which it was originally paired.  相似文献   

18.
In Experiment 1, male rats were trained to press both bars in a two-choice apparatus and were then given observational training of a go/no-go discrimination in which the observed operation of two inaccessible, dissimilar bars by a hidden experimenter constituted S+ and S?. After discrimination was established, individual rats were permitted access to the two bars. Six of the seven rats consistently pressed the S+ bar on 10 test trials, but failed to reverse bar preference after observational training was reversed. In Experiment 2, nine naive males received the same observational training as in Experiment 1, but without any pretraining to press either bar. All rats pressed the S+ bar on initial test and did so consistently throughout the 10 trials. Six of these rats received reversal training of the go/no-go discrimination after the 10 test trials. As in Experiment 1, all rats failed to press the new S+ bar. However, five of six rats in another group, which received reversal trainingprior to any test trials, did reverse and press the new S+ bar. In Experiment 3, controls for possible confounding effects of overtraining trials were conducted. These manipulations had no effect; the rats tested before reversal still failed to press the S+ bar, and the rats reversed before testing all reversed or pressed the most recent S+ bar. That is, S-R learning predominated over S-S learning if active, though unreinforced, responding to a particular bar intervened. In contrast, however, a cognitive (S-S) interpretation of directed response learning was supported by the results of Experiment 4, in which the rats that learned the go/no-go discrimination without responding (only by auditory and light cues) failed to press the S+ bar consistently.  相似文献   

19.
In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained to discriminate short (2 sec) and long (8 sec) durations of tone by responding to red and green comparison stimuli. During delay testing, a systematic response bias to the comparison stimulus correct for the long duration occurred. Tests of responding without the tone reduced accuracy on long-sample trials but not on short-sample trials suggesting that the pigeons were attending to the tone and not simply timing the total trial duration. The pigeons were then trained to match short (2 sec) and long (8 sec) durations of light to blue/yellow comparisons. During delay testing, “choose-long errors” occurred following tone durations, but “choose-short errors” occurred following light durations. In Experiment 2, accuracy was assessed on test trials in which the tone and the light signals were simultaneously presented for the same duration or for different durations. Pigeons responded accurately to durations of light, but were unable to accurately respond to durations of tone simultaneously presented with the light. The data from Experiment 1 suggest that there are important differences between light and tone signals with respect to the events that control the termination of timing. The data from Experiment 2 indicate that pigeons cannot simultaneously time visual and auditory signals independently and without interference. Consequently, they are inconsistent with the idea that there is a single internal clock that times both tone and light durations.  相似文献   

20.
Delayed simple discriminations are typically retained more accurately over longer delays by pigeons than are delayed conditional discriminations (e.g., Honig & Wasserman, 1981). In two experiments, we investigated the extent to which trial outcomes contribute to this difference by comparing performances when all trials ended with food reinforcement versus when only half of the trials did. Experiment 1 showed that when food was presented on all trials, contingent upon either pecking or not pecking the test stimulus, levels of retention and rates of forgetting were comparable for these two tasks. By contrast, Experiment 2 showed better retention of delayed simple than delayed conditional discriminations when half of the trials ended with food and the other half in extinction. Furthermore, delayed simple discriminations were retained more accurately with food versus no-food outcomes than with food at the end of every trial, whereas the reverse was true for delayed conditional discriminations. These findings indicate that retention differences between these tasks are another instance of the differential outcomes effect.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号