|
|
Zentall, T. R. (1999). Support for a theory of memory for event duration must distinguish between test-trial ambiguity and actual memory loss. J Exp Anal Behav, 72(3), 467–472.
Abstract: Staddon and Higa's (1999) trace-strength theory of timing and memory for event duration can account for pigeons' bias to “choose short” when retention intervals are introduced and to “choose long” when, following training with a fixed retention interval, retention intervals are shortened. However, it does not account for the failure of pigeons to choose short when the intertrial interval is distinct from the retention interval. That finding suggests that stimulus generalization (or ambiguity) between the intertrial interval and the retention interval may result in an effect that has been attributed to memory loss. Such artifacts must be eliminated before a theory of memory for event duration can be adequately tested.
|
|
|
|
Dougherty, D. M., & Lewis, P. (1993). Generalization of a tactile stimulus in horses. J Exp Anal Behav, 59(3), 521–528.
Abstract: Using horses, we investigated the control of operant behavior by a tactile stimulus (the training stimulus) and the generalization of behavior to six other similar test stimuli. In a stall, the experimenters mounted a response panel in the doorway. Located on this panel were a response lever and a grain dispenser. The experimenters secured a tactile-stimulus belt to the horse's back. The stimulus belt was constructed by mounting seven solenoids along a piece of burlap in a manner that allowed each to provide the delivery of a tactile stimulus, a repetitive light tapping, at different locations (spaced 10.0 cm apart) along the horse's back. Two preliminary steps were necessary before generalization testing: training a measurable response (lip pressing) and training on several reinforcement schedules in the presence of a training stimulus (tapping by one of the solenoids). We then gave each horse two generalization test sessions. Results indicated that the horses' behavior was effectively controlled by the training stimulus. Horses made the greatest number of responses to the training stimulus, and the tendency to respond to the other test stimuli diminished as the stimuli became farther away from the training stimulus. These findings are discussed in the context of behavioral principles and their relevance to the training of horses.
|
|
|
|
Nevin, J. A., & Shettleworth, S. J. (1966). An analysis of contrast effects in multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav, 9(4), 305–315.
|
|
|
|
De Moraes Ferrari, E. A., & Todorov, J. C. (1980). Concurrent avoidance of shocks by pigeons pecking a key. J Exp Anal Behav., 30(3), 329–333.
Abstract: Three pigeons were studied on concurrent, unsignaled, avoidance schedules in a two-key procedure. Shock-shock intervals were two seconds in both schedules. The response-shock interval on one key was always 22 seconds, while the response-shock interval associated with the other key was varied from 7 to 52 seconds in different experimental conditions. Response rates on the key associated with the varied schedule tended to decrease when the response-shock interval length was increased. Responding on the key associated with the constant schedule was not systematically affected.
|
|
|
|
Farmer-Dougan, V., & Dougan, J. (1999). The Man Who Listens To Behavior: Folk Wisdom And Behavior Analysis From A Real Horse Whisperer. J Exp Anal Behav, 72(1), 139–149.
Abstract: The popular novel and movie The Horse Whisperer are based on the work of several real-life horse
whisperers, the most famous of whom is Monty Roberts. Over the last 50 years, Roberts has developed
a technique for training horses that is both more effective and less aversive than traditional training
techniques. An analysis of Roberts` methods (as described in his book, The Man Who Listens to Horses)
indicates a deep understanding of behavioral principles including positive reinforcement, timeout,
species-specific defense reactions, learned helplessness, and the behavioral analysis of language.
Roberts developed his theory and techniques on the basis of personal experience and folk wisdom,
and not as the result of formal training in behavior analysis. Behavior analysts can clearly learn from
such insightful yet behaviorally incorrect practitioners, just as such practitioners can benefit from
the objective science of behavior analysts.
|
|
