|
|
Wasserman, E. A., Gagliardi, J. L., Cook, B. R., Kirkpatrick-Steger, K., Astley, S. L., & Biederman, I. (1996). The pigeon's recognition of drawings of depth-rotated stimuli. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process, 22(2), 205–221.
Abstract: Four experiments used a four-choice discrimination learning paradigm to explore the pigeon's recognition of line drawings of four objects (an airplane, a chair, a desk lamp, and a flashlight) that were rotated in depth. The pigeons reliably generalized discriminative responding to pictorial stimuli over all untrained depth rotations, despite the bird's having been trained at only a single depth orientation. These generalization gradients closely resembled those found in prior research that used other stimulus dimensions. Increasing the number of different vantage points in the training set from one to three broadened the range of generalized testing performance, with wider spacing of the training orientations more effectively broadening generalized responding. Template and geon theories of visual recognition are applied to these empirical results.
|
|
|
|
Nallan, G. B., Pace, G. M., McCoy, D. F., & Zentall, T. R. (1983). The role of elicited responding in the feature-positive effect. Am J Psychol, 96(3), 377–390.
Abstract: Hearst and Jenkins proposed in 1974 that elicited responding accounts for the feature-positive effect. To test this position, pigeons were exposed to a feature-positive or feature-negative discrimination between successively presented displays--one consisted of a red and a green response key and the other consisted of two green response keys. There were four main conditions: 5-5 (5-sec trials, 5-sec intertrial intervals), 5-30, 30-30, and 30-180. Conditions 5-30 and 30-180 should produce the largest amount of elicited responding, and therefore the largest feature-positive effects. A response-independent bird was yoked to each response-dependent bird to allow direct assessment of the amount of elicited responding generated by each condition. Contrary to the predictions by Hearst and Jenkins's theory, response-dependent birds showed large feature-positive effects in each condition. The largest feature-positive effect was obtained in condition 5-5. Response-independent birds produced similar results, but manifested low response rates.
|
|
|
|
Zentall, T. R., Weaver, J. E., & Clement, T. S. (2004). Pigeons group time intervals according to their relative duration. Psychon Bull Rev, 11(1), 113–117.
Abstract: In the present research, we asked whether pigeons tended to judge time intervals not only in terms of their absolute value but also relative to a duration from which they must be discriminated (i.e., longer or shorter). Pigeons were trained on two independent temporal discriminations. In one discrimination, sample durations of 2 and 8 sec were associated with, for example, red and green hue comparisons, respectively, and in the other discrimination, sample durations of 4 and 16 sec were associated with vertical and horizontal line comparisons, respectively. If pigeons are trained on a temporal discrimination and tested with intermediate durations, the subjective midpoint typically occurs close to the geometric mean of the two trained values. The 4- and 8-sec values were selected to be the geometric mean of the two values in the other discrimination. When a 4-sec test sample was presented with the comparisons from the 2- and 8-sec discrimination, the pigeons preferred the comparison associated with the shorter sample. Similarly, when an 8-sec test sample was presented with the comparisons from the 4- and 16-sec discrimination, the pigeons preferred the comparison associated with the longer sample. Thus, a relative grouping effect was found. That is, durations that should have produced indifferent choice were influenced by their relative durations (shorter than or longer than the alternative) during training.
|
|
|
|
Nallan, G. B., Pace, G. M., McCoy, D. F., & Zentall, T. R. (1979). Temporal parameters of the feature positive effect. Am J Psychol, 92(4), 703–710.
Abstract: Trial duration and intertrial interval duration were parametrically varied between groups of pigeons exposed to a discrimination involving the presence vs. the absence of a dot. Half the groups received the dot as the positive stimulus (feature positive groups) and half the groups received the dot as the negative stimulus (feature negative groups). Faster learning by the feature positive birds (feature positive effect) was found when the trial duration was short (5 sec) regardless of whether the intertrial interval was short (5 sec) or long (30 sec). No evidence for a feature positive effect was found when the trial duration was long (30 sec) regardless of the length of the intertrial interval (30 sec or 180 sec). The results suggest that short trial duration is a necessary condition for the occurrence of the feature positive effect, and neither intertrial interval nor trial duration/intertrial interval ratio are important for its occurrence. The suggestion that mechanisms underlying the feature positive effect and autoshaping might be similar was not supported by the present experiment since the trial duration/intertrial interval ration parameter appears to play an important role in autoshaping but not the feature positive effect.
|
|
|
|
Fairhurst, S., Gallistel, C. R., & Gibbon, J. (2003). Temporal landmarks: proximity prevails. Anim. Cogn., 6(2), 113–120.
Abstract: Subjects in conditioning experiments time their conditioned responses relative to the onsets of the conditioned stimuli (CSs). These onsets are temporal landmarks, by reference to which subjects may estimate the location of the unconditioned stimulus (US) in time. In a serial compound conditioning paradigm, a long duration CS comes on first, followed later by a second shorter CS, creating both a long-range and a short-range predictor of the US. We ask whether displacing the short-range predictor relative to the long-range predictor causes subjects to strike a compromise between the different temporal locations predicted by the two CSs. In three experiments with pigeons, we varied the training conditions so as to favor or militate against this outcome. However, in all conditions, there was no compromise; after the onset of the displaced short-range CS, the timing of conditioned responding was governed by it alone. This result contrasts with the compromises that are seen when the feeding time predicted by a CS is put in conflict with the time predicted by the circadian clock, and with the similar compromises sometimes seen when a nearby spatial landmark is displaced relative to a larger spatial context.
|
|
|
|
Zentall, T. R., & Clement, T. S. (2002). Memory mechanisms in pigeons: evidence of base-rate neglect. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process, 28(1), 111–115.
Abstract: In delayed matching to sample, once acquired, pigeons presumably choose comparisons according to their memory for (the strength of) the sample. When memory for the sample is sufficiently weak, comparison choice should depend on the history of reinforcement associated with each of the comparison stimuli. In the present research, pigeons acquired two matching tasks in which Sample S1 was associated with one comparison from each task, C1 and C3, whereas Sample S2 was associated with Comparison C2, and Sample S3 was associated with Comparison C4. As the retention interval increased, the pigeons showed a bias to choose the comparison (C1 or C3) associated with the more frequently occurring sample (S1). Thus, pigeons were sensitive also to the (irrelevant) likelihood that each of the samples was presented. The results suggest that pigeons may allow their reference memory for the overall sample frequency to influence comparison choice, independent of the comparison stimuli present.
|
|
|
|
Clement, T. S., & Zentall, T. R. (2002). Second-order contrast based on the expectation of effort and reinforcement. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process, 28(1), 64–74.
Abstract: Pigeons prefer signals for reinforcement that require greater effort (or time) to obtain over those that require less effort to obtain (T. S. Clement, J. Feltus, D. H. Kaiser, & T. R. Zentall, 2000). Preference was attributed to contrast (or to the relatively greater improvement in conditions) produced by the appearance of the signal when it was preceded by greater effort. In Experiment 1, the authors of the present study demonstrated that the expectation of greater effort was sufficient to produce such a preference (a second-order contrast effect). In Experiments 2 and 3, low versus high probability of reinforcement was substituted for high versus low effort, respectively, with similar results. In Experiment 3, the authors found that the stimulus preference could be attributed to positive contrast (when the discriminative stimuli represented an improvement in the probability of reinforcement) and perhaps also negative contrast (when the discriminative stimuli represented reduction in the probability of reinforcement).
|
|
