共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
In Experiment 1, three food-deprived pigeons received trials that began with red or green illumination of the center pecking key. Two or four pecks on this sample key turned it off and initiated a 0- to 10-sec delay. Following the delay, the two outer comparison keys were illuminated, one with red and one with green light. In one condition, a single peck on either of these keys turned the other key off and produced either grain reinforcement (if the comparison that was pecked matched the preceding sample) or the intertrial interval (if it did not match). In other conditions, 3 or 15 additional pecks were required to produce reinforcement or the intertrial interval. The frequency of pecking the matching comparison stimulus (matching accuracy) decreased as the delay increased, increased as the sample ratio was increased, and decreased as the comparison ratio was increased. The results of Experiment 2 suggested that higher comparison ratios adversely affect matching accuracy primarily by delaying reinforcement for choosing the correct comparison. The results of Experiment 3, in which delay of reinforcement for choosing the matching comparison was manipulated, confirmed that delayed reinforcement decreases matching accuracy. 相似文献
2.
Two pigeons were trained on a six-key modified oddity-from-sample procedure. The stimuli were olor pictures of birds, butterflies, and human faces. Initially, the third peck on the sample key which presented one of three different bird pictures) lit only one comparison key. Every three dditional pecks on the sample illuminated another comparison key. Fifteen sample pecks produced he maximum of five comparison stimuli. A peck on the comparison key that presented the non-atching bird picture produced grain. Pecks on matching keys turned off all the comparison keys nd repeated the trial. The birds learned to peck each sample until the non-matching comparison timulus was produced, and then to peck that key. After acquisition (70%–90% accuracy), the hree bird stimuli were replaced by a new set of three bird pictures. Subsequent phases provided ew sets of bird, butterfly, and human face stimuli. Both birds showed transfer of oddity learning o the novel samples. The data suggest that the birds may have been engaging in conceptual-type oddity learning, rather than learning discrete five-key discriminations or a series of two component chains. 相似文献
3.
Cathie E. Alderks 《Learning & behavior》1986,14(3):331-335
Seventeen pigeons observed a model peck an illuminated key at either a high or a low rate and obtain a high or low percentage of possible reinforcement. Observers were subsequently placed on an automaintenance schedule. Although there was no difference among groups in the number of trials to the first peck, when the present data were compared with other researchers’ automaintenance-acquisition data, there was some indication that modeling reduced the number of trials to the first peck over nonmodeled birds. However, by the end of 20 sessions, the birds that had observed a model pecking at a high rate and with consistent reinforcement pecked significantly faster than those that had observed the model peck at a slow rate or obtain infrequent reinforcement. The conclusion is that two types of information are transferred via a model: first, a correlation between the stimulus and the reinforcer, and second, the specific or minute attributes of the schedule that may produce reinforcement. 相似文献
4.
Kelly J. Stanhope 《Learning & behavior》1989,17(3):311-321
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.
Each of four pigeons was exposed to a single random-ratio schedule of reinforcement in which the probability of reinforcement
for a peck on either of two keys was 1/25. Reinforcer amounts were determined by an iterated prisoner’s dilemma (IPD) matrix
in which the “other player” (a computer) playedtit-for-tat. One key served as thecooperation(C) key; the other served as thedefection(D) key. If a peck was scheduled to be reinforced and the D-key was pecked, the immediate reinforcer of that peck was always
higher than it would have been had the C-key been pecked. However, if the C-key was pecked and thefollowing peck was scheduled to be reinforced, reinforcement amount for pecks on either key were higher than they would have been if
the previous peck had been on the D-key. Although immediate reinforcement was always higher for D-pecks, the overall reinforcement
rate increased linearly with the proportion of C-pecks. C-pecks thus constituted a form of self-control. All the pigeons initially
defected with this procedure. However, when feedback signals were introduced that indicated which key had last been pecked,cooperation (relative rate of C-pecks)—hence, self-control—increased for all the pigeons. 相似文献
6.
Pigeons were allowed to observe a stimulus signaling food (S+) by pecking one side key of a three-key chamber, or a stimulus signaling extinction (S?) by pecking the opposite side key. Components were 30 sec long and separated by 3-sec blackouts (after extinction periods) or 3-sec access to an illuminated food hopper (terminating food periods). Pigeons came to peck the S+ key almost exclusively. When food and extinction periods were presented in random order, the S+ key was pecked in nearly every component. But when the components alternated in abab fashion, the probability of an S+ keypeck during extinction decreased (after 3-sec access to food) while remaining high in food components (after 3-sec blackout). This suggested the development of trace stimulus control by the stimuli separating the components and that redundant stimuli would maintain observing when they signaled food. Results were discussed in terms of traditional notions of conditioned reinforcement and were not seen as supporting information theory explanations of observing behavior. 相似文献
7.
Barry Schwartz 《Learning & behavior》1973,1(3):164-166
Response key illuminations were followed by food delivery or shock, and keypecks were programmed to prevent the occurrence of whichever stimulus was scheduled. At high shock intensity, pigeons did not peck: at low shock intensity, pigeons pecked in about half of the trials. When different key colors signaled food and shock trials, pigeons pecked on food trials, thus preventing food delivery, but not on shock trials, thus failing to avoid shock delivery. That pecks occurred despite the fact that they avoided food but did not occur when they avoided shock is taken as evidence that the keypeck is frequently governed by biological predispositions, and not by its consequences. 相似文献
8.
Donald M. Wilkie 《Learning & behavior》1986,14(3):257-266
In the delayed matching of key location procedure, pigeons must remember the location of the sample key in order to choose correctly between two comparison keys. The deleterious effect of short intertrial intervals on key location matching found in previous studies suggested that pigeons’ short-term spatial memory is affected by proactive interference. However, because a reward expectancy mechanism may account for the intertriai interval effect, additional research aimed at demonstrating proactive interference was warranted. In Experiment 1, matching accuracy did not decline from early to late trials within a session, a finding inconsistent with a proactive interference effect. In Experiment 2, evidence suggestive of proactive interference was found: Matching was more accurate when the locations that served as distractors and as samples were chosen from different sets. However, this effect could have been due to differences in task difficulty, and the results of the two subsequent experiments provided no evidence of proactive interference. In Experiment 3, the distractor on Trialn was either the location that had served as the sample on Trialn ? 1 or one that had been a sample on earlier trials. Matching accuracy was not inferior on the former type of trial. In Experiment 4, the stimuli that served as samples and distractors were taken from sets containing 2, 3, 5, or 9 locations. Matching accuracy was no worse, actually slightly better, with smaller memory set sizes. Overall, these findings suggested that pigeons’ memory for spatial location may be immune to proactive interference. However, when, in Experiment 5, an intratrial manipulation was used, clear evidence of proactive interference was found: Matching accuracy was considerably lower when the sample was preceded by the distractor for that trial than when it was preceded by the sample or by nothing. Possible reasons why interference was produced by intratrial but not intertrial manipulations are discussed, as are implications of these data for models of pigeons’ short-term spatial memory. 相似文献
9.
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
10.
For three groups of rats, an auditory CS, presented while the animals were responding on a variable-interval schedule for food reinforcement, was terminated on half of the trials with a noncontingent footshock. For two groups, half of the trials were also followed after 5 sec by the delivery of free food. In the positively correlated condition (PC) the free food was presented on shocked trials and in the negatively correlated condition (NC) on the nonshocked trials, while the remaining group (S) never received free food. In a fourth group the shock was omitted and free food delivered on half of the trials. Although all shocked groups showed a significant suppression, the magnitude was greater for Group PC than for Groups NC and S, which did not differ. Suppression did not result from the pairing of the CS with food alone. These results do not support the counterconditioning hypothesis that the pairing of a normally noxious stimulus with food reduces its aversiveness. 相似文献
11.
After training with a variable-interval schedule of positive reinforcement, pigeons were tested for stimulus generalization along the hue dimension. For one group, the stimulus was located on the response key. For a second group, the stimulus was located on a surface adjacent to the response key. The stimulus-on-key group produced the typical steep gradients normally found with hue stimuli; the stimulus-off-key group produced flat gradients. After discrimination training between the presence and absence of the hue stimulus, both groups produced decremental gradients. In a second experiment, naive pigeons were trained to peck a transparent key with the stimulus surface located approximately 3.8 cm behind the key. When tested for generalization, the hue gradients were decremental. The results suggest that location of the stimulus in the line of sight with pecking is a necessary condition for stimulus control by hue after nondifferential training. 相似文献
12.
Control of beak opening (gape) and peck location was examined in pigeons. Feeding pecks showed accurate guidance that positioned the seed between the beaks. At the moment of contact with the seed, gape was proportional to seed diameter, although pecks with gape less than seed diameter were more frequent following an increase in seed size during a meal. There were no substantial differences between pigeons trained to keypeck with autoshaping and those trained with operant conditioning procedures. With either procedure, water reinforcement produced keypecks with the beak closed; seed reinforcers of different sizes produced means for gape proportional to the seed diameters. Black or white circular stimuli of different sizes projected as conditioning signals had little influence upon gape, but a greater percentage of responses was directed to white stimuli. These results indicate that visual stimuli elicit and orient the peck, whereas the adjustment of gape also involves the somatosensory stimuli provided during previous experience with a particular reinforcer or food type. 相似文献
13.
In two experiments involving present/absent sample matching, we tested whether the visual stimuli or differential sample behavior served as the basis for comparison choice. In both experiments, one group (FR/DRO) was required to peck the present sample and to refrain from pecking the absent sample (as typically occurs with fixed duration present/absent samples), and the other group (FR/FR) was required to peck both samples. In Experiment 1, the samples were a black dot on a white field (present) and the white field alone (absent). In Experiment 2, the samples were a yellow hue (present) and a dark response key (absent). In both experiments, divergent retention functions were found only for the FR/DRO group. These results suggest that, in nonhedonic present/absent sample matching, it is the behavior directed toward the present sample, rather than the visual stimulus itself, that serves as the basis for comparison choice. 相似文献
14.
Sample and comparison location as factors in matching acquisition,transfer, and acquired equivalence
Urcuioli PJ 《Learning & behavior》2007,35(4):252-261
Pigeons learned symbolic matching with samples appearing equally often on left and right keys. For a location-relevant group,
the reinforced comparison choice for each sample reversed across sample locations; for a location-irrelevant group, the reinforced
choices were the same. Consistent with the hypothesis that samples at different locations are functionally different for pigeons,
Experiment 1 showed that matching acquisition was comparable in these two groups. Nevertheless, the location-irrelevant group
eventually ignored sample location, given that their performances subsequently transferred to a novel (center-key) sample
location. This transfer was not simply due to sample familiarity at different training locations; rather, it required that
left- and right-key samples occasion the same reinforced choices in training. Acquired equivalence between those samples was
then assessed in Experiment 2. The location-irrelevant group showed the predicted equivalence effects, but the location-relevant
group did not—in fact, its results were the opposite of those predicted by equivalence. Their results indicate that the functional
comparison stimuli are also defined in terms of their locations. 相似文献
15.
Terry and Wagner (1975) have suggested that short-term retention of information about an event is enhanced if the occurrence of the event is surprising. To investigate this idea, we trained two groups of pigeons in a preparatory-releaser procedure in which half the trials started with the presentation of food (the preparatory event). The preparatory food presensation was signaled by an 8-sec white keylight in the signaled, but not in the unsignaled, group. After a retention interval, varying between 2 and 32 sec, the releaser stimulus (CSR), a red keylight, was presented for 8 sec in the absence of any reinforcement. The remaining trials were initiated by the presentation of CSR, and the first peck occurring 8 sec after the onset of CSR was reinforced by food. The preparatory event controlled responding to CSR at the short retention interval, with the level of control declining systematically with increasing retention intervals. On probe test trials, the presentation of the preparatory food event was preceded by a stimulus that had previously been paired (CS+) or unpaired with food (CS?). Discriminative responding to CSr was better following CS? than following CS+ in the unsignaled, but not the signaled, group. These results suggest that the enhanced retention following surprising preparatory events reflects a generalization decrement induced by changing the signaling conditions between training and testing. 相似文献
16.
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
17.
Pigeons were trained to produce one serial list in the presence of a green background cue and another serial list in the presence of a red background cue when the items for both serial lists were presented on each trial. This demonstrated a combination of serial learning and conditional discrimination learning not previously shown in pigeons. Specifically, when presented with four geometric forms, A B C D, in random locations of a five-key display, the pigeons learned to peck A B C when the background was green and A B D when the background was red. Accuracy on the conditional string ranged from 73% to 85%. Transfer tests using different locations of the stimuli on the keys showed positive transfer, thus ruling out learning of specific locations as the basis of the accurate performance. Above-chance performance was maintained when the conditional colors were presented only on the key that did not contain one of the serial stimuli. The results are interpreted in terms of a chaining model that postulates that the sequential selections were controlled by cues produced by both onset of the trial and prior selections within the trial. 相似文献
18.
In temporal discriminations tasks, more than one stimulus may function as a time marker. We studied two of them in a matching-to-sample task, the sample keylight and the houselight that signaled the intertrial interval (ITI). One group of pigeons learned a symmetrical matching-to-sample task with two samples (2 s or 18 s of a center keylight) and two comparisons (red and green side keys), whereas another group of pigeons learned an asymmetrical matching-to-sample task with three samples (2 s, 6 s, and 18 s) and two comparisons (red and green). In the asymmetrical task, 6-s and 18-s samples shared the same comparison. In a subsequent retention test, both groups showed a preference for the comparison associated with the longer samples, a result consistent with the hypothesis that pigeons based their choices on the duration elapsed since the offset of the houselight (i.e., sample duration + retention interval). Results from two no-sample tests further corroborated the importance of the ITI illumination as a time marker: When the ITI was illuminated, the proportion of choices correlated positively with the retention interval; when the ITI was darkened, choices fell to random levels. However, the absolute value of choice proportions suggested that the sample stimulus was also a time marker. How multiple stimuli acquire control over behavior and how they combine remains to be worked out. 相似文献
19.
Temporal parameters were varied in two different observing response procedures. In Experiment I, concurrent variable-interval chain schedules were employed. Responding on one key led to either a stimulus correlated with reinforcement or a stimulus correlated with time-out. Responding on the other key led to a stimulus which ended either in reinforcement or time-out. The duration of the delay to reinforcement or time-out was varied, the delays for all three stimuli always remaining equal in a given phase. It was found that the longer the delay, the greater the preference for the observing response. In Experiment II a procedure was employed in which birds pecked during a “trial” to produce stimuli correlated with reinforcement or time-out at the end of the trial. The duration of the trial ending in time out was varied while the positive trial duration remained constant. It was found that the longer the duration of the negative trial, the greater the strength of observing responses. The results were interpreted as supporting the hypothesis that the value of a positive stimulus is a function of time spent in stimuli correlated with nonreinforcement.
相似文献20.
In Experiment 1, it was shown that generalization testing following successive discrimination training between two closely spaced wavelengths results in a sharp gradient with a peak of responding shifted from S+ so as to be further removed from S?. Testing after a 24-h delay resulted in a flatter gradient with greater peak (and area) shift. A 5-min pretest exposure to S+, reinforced or unreinforced, or to S? (unreinforced) reinstated immediate test performance; free reinforcement with no discriminative stimulus present had no such effect. Experiment 2 replicated the flattening of generalization gradients and enhanced peak shift in delayed testing. Free feeding in a pretest treatment with a distinctive food uniquely associated with the wavelength discrimination problem failed to reinstate immediate test performance. Experiment 3 tested the hypothesis that free feeding failed as a reactivation treatment because it did not engender keypecking. Subjects were trained to peck a vertical line stimulus before being given wavelength discrimination training. Again, the enhanced peak shift and greater flattening with delayed wavelength generalization testing was found. A pretest exposure to the vertical line stimulus elicited pecking but had no effect on subsequent wavelength generalization. Thus, only a reactivation treatment that included one of the discrimination training stimuli was effective in producing delayed test performance comparable to that obtained in an immediate test. 相似文献