Summation and transfer of negative occasion setting

Two experiments examined the summation and transfer of negative occasion setting in serial feature negative (X→A?/A+) and negative patterning discriminations (X→A?/X+/A+) in a discrete-trial operant task with rats. With both discrimination procedures, negative occasion setting transferred readily (but not perfectly) to cues trained as targets in another similar discrimination procedure, but not to cues that were separately trained. Furthermore, with both discrimination procedures, the negative occasion-setting powers of features from two individual discriminations summed, both when those features were trained with the same targets and when they were trained with different targets. After negative patterning discriminations, in which the feature (X) cues were separately reinforced, this summation of negative occasion setting occurred despite the concomitant summation of the features’ excitatory control in the absence of an explicit target cue. These data, which replicated and extended previously reported data from Pavlovian feature negative procedures, are discussed in the context of hierarchical, generalization, and network models of discrimination learning.     

Transfer of occasion setting: The role of generalization decrement

In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained on two feature-positive discriminations. A transfer test examined whether the feature from one discrimination enhanced responding to the target from the other. Transfer was obtained, but it was incomplete; the feature produced less responding to the transfer target than to its own. Experiments 2 and 3 examined whether this attenuation of responding was the product of generalization decrement induced by the novel combination of feature and target on transfer trials. Birds were trained on a pair of pseudo-occasion-setting discriminations in which each target was reinforced whether or not it was preceded by its feature. In a subsequent test, there was no loss of responding when novel combinations of features and targets were introduced; on the contrary, responding was, if anything, enhanced in this condition. This suggests that imperfect transfer is not due to generalization decrement but to the fact that an occasion setter is specific to its target stimulus.     

Conditioning of simultaneous and serial feature-positive discriminations

Three experiments with rat subjects examined the development of simultaneous and serial feature-positive discriminations in appetitive conditioning. In Experiment 1, reinforced presentations of a simultaneous light-tone compound were intermixed with nonreinforced presentations of either the light or the tone. The compound stimulus acquired conditioned behaviors of a form characteristic of the predictive feature alone; the element common to reinforced and nonreinforced trials did not evoke conditioned behavior. In Experiment 2, reinforced presentations of a serial light-trace-tone compound were intermixed with nonreinforced tone-alone presentations. The light feature stimulus acquired conditioned behaviors characteristic of visual CSs. The tone stimulus, common to reinforced and nonreinforced trials, evoked conditioned behaviors characteristic of auditory CSs, but only when preceded by the light. In Experiment 3, variations in the interval between the light and tone on reinforced trials had little effect on responding to the light CS but substantially altered the pattern of responding to the tone CS. These results suggested that simultaneous and serial feature-positive discriminations may be solved differently. Performance in simultaneous feature-positive discriminations may be determined solely by associations between the feature stimulus and the reinforcer, but performance in serial discriminations may also involve the acquisition of a conditional cue function to the feature.     

The effects of intertrial and feature-target intervals on operant serial feature-positive discrimination learning

The effects of intertrial interval (ITI) and feature-target interval (FTI) on the nature of learning in discrete-trial operant serial feature-positive (feature → target+ / target?) discrimination training were examined in two experiments with rats. Discrimination performance was acquired more rapidly with longer ITIs and shorter FTIs. In contrast, transfer to a separately trained target was greater with shorter ITIs regardless of FTI. Persistence of discrimination performance after feature extinction was greater with longer ITIs. Only the last of these performance measures showed evidence for invariance with constant ITI/FTI ratios. The results are discussed in the context of theories of occasion setting.     

Feature extinction enhances transfer of occasion setting

In three experiments, transfer effects in appetitive serial feature-positive discrimination procedures (X→A+,A?) were examined with rat subjects. Nonreinforced presentations of the feature (X) alone had little or no effect on that cue’s ability to modulate responding to the target cue with which it had originally been trained (A) but enhanced its ability to modulate responding to another cue (B), which had been the target within another serial feature-positive discrimination (Y→B+,B?). These effects were observed when the nonreinforcedX presentations occurred either concurrently withX→A+,A? training or afterward. Regardless of whether or not nonreinforcedX presentations were administered,X did not modulate responding evoked by a cue that had not been trained within a serial feature-positive discrimination. These data help resolve conflicts in published reports of transfer or its absence in this conditioning situation, and shed light on the nature of the modulatory or occasion-setting powers of feature cues in serial feature-positive discrimination learning.     

Transfer testing after serial feature-ambiguous discrimination in Pavlovian keypeck conditioning

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.     

Feature-positive and feature-negative discrimination learning maintained by negative reinforcement in rhesus monkeys

Rhesus monkeys were trained to press panels to escape or avoid shock. Escape and avoidance training were combined factorially with feature-positive (FP) and feature-negative (FN) discriminations. In the FP situation, S+ trials were characterized by one red and two green panel displays and S? consisted of an all green panel array. In the FN arrangement, S+ and S? arrays were reversed. When compared properly, FP discriminations were learned more readily than FN discriminations in both escape and avoidance training conditions. Positive tracking was associated with FP discriminations, and feature avoidance characterized the FN tasks. These data suggest that in primates, feature responses (i.e., tracking behaviors) are more a function of the operant contingency than of the Pavlovian correlation.     

The ontogeny of the feature-positive effect in young chicks

The wide generality of the feature-positive effect (FPE) has caused speculation that the FPE may represent innate biases in the stimulus control of discriminative responding. There is little experimental evidence to date ragarding this possibility. In the present study, 1- or 4-day-old chicks were trained on a feature-positive (FP) or feature-negative (FN) discrimination with heat reinforcement. After the acquisition phase, these subjects received extinction training followed by a reacquisition phase. The FP performance was superior to the FN performance in both age groups. Extinction resulted in improved discrimination performance in both the FP and FN conditions. Unmasking of FN learning by the extinction treatment suggests that the FPE represents a deficit in performance, rather than an inability to learn the FN task. These data demonstrate that adult-like performance on feature discriminations is evident as early as the first day post-hatch.     

Feature-negative effect in rats’ discrimination learning in the runway

In two experiments, rats were trained on a successive go/no-go discrimination problem in the runway in which the positive (S+) and negative (S?) discriminanda were differentiated by the presence or absence of a distinctive feature. The feature in Experiment 1 was a series of flashing lights over the runway. In Experiment 2, the feature was a pretrial reinforcement (Phase 1), or pretrial reinforcement versus pretrial nonreinforcement (Phase 2). The feature signaled S+ trials in feature-positive (FP) groups and S? trials in feature-negative (FN) groups. The original discrimination was reversed in Phase 2 of both experiments. With the exception of the pretrial nonreinforcement groups in Experiment 2, there was an asymmetry in discrimination learning in both phases of both experiments favoring superior discrimination learning by FN subjects over FP subjects, a feature-negative effect. Implications of the results for an information processing account of asymmetries in learning feature discriminations are discussed.     

Temporal determinants of occasion setting in feature-positive discriminations

Three experiments examined the acquisition and transfer of Pavlovian feature-positive discriminations (XA+, A?) in rat subjects. To identify the nature of the associations formed in those discriminations, the form of the conditioned responses (CRs) was examined. If the feature,X, and common element, A, cues started and ended together onXA compoud trials, associations betweenX and the food unconditioned stimulus (US) were acquired. If the onsets and/or terminations ofX preceded those of A,X acquired the ability to set the occasion for responding to A, that is, A evoked CRs only onXA compound trials. The acquisition of occasion setting was favored when (1) the onset of X preceded that of A, (2) the interval betweenX and A and/or the US was relatively long, and (3) the termination ofX occurred prior to the onset of A. The occasion-setting power ofX was fairly specific to A:X did not modulate responding evoked by another cue that had been first trained and then extinguished or by a cue that had been paired with the US only a few times. However,X did enhance responding to a cue that had been a common element in another, identical feature-positive discrimination. That transfer was somewhat greater if theX and A terminated together than ifX terminated prior to the onset of A. Implications for theories of stimulus control in Pavlovian conditioning are discussed.     

Intertrial interval effects in pavlovian serial feature positive discriminations

The effects of the intertrial interval (ITI) on learning and performance in Pavlovian appetitive serial feature positive (SFP) discriminations were examined in three experiments with rats. With longer ITIs, acquisition was more rapid, and there was less transfer of the feature’s behavioral control to a separately trained target cue, suggesting that longer ITIs encouraged the use of an occasion setting strategy. Behavior was also affected by discrimination-specific ITIs. Rats were trained with two SFP discriminations. The overall ITI was held constant, but the intervals between trials of one discrimination were varied by intermixing different numbers of trials from the other discrimination. Learning was more rapid when the intervals between trials of a single discrimination were longer. A sequential analyses showed that performance on a trial was impaired when it was preceded by a trial that included the same target cue but with the opposite trial outcome. The results are discussed in the frameworks of proactive interference effects and deletion-comparator processes (Cooper, Aronson, Balsam, & Gibbon, 1990.)     

Contextual control of pavlovian feature-positive and feature-negative discriminations

Three pigeons were trained with a Pavlovian serial feature-positive (F-P) discrimination task in a light context, in which the houselight was on, and with a Pavlovian serial feature-negative (F-N) discrimination task in a dark context, in which the houselight was off. Three other pigeons were trained with the F-P task in the dark context and the F-N task in the light context. These two contextual conditions were changed randomly trial by trial. The former birds learned the tasks within 60 sessions, by responding exclusively to the target keylight after the feature tone in the light context and by responding exclusively to the target not preceded by the feature in the dark context. Two of the latter birds required separate training of the F-P and the F-N tasks to acquire the discrimination: responding exclusively to the target after the feature in the dark context and responding exclusively to the target not preceded by the feature in the light context. The third bird, however, failed to learn the discrimination even with separate training. These results indicate that the four-term contingency (the context-feature-target-food relationship) controlled the birds’ behavior in the Pavlovian setting. The insertion of a temporal gap between the feature and the target impaired the F-N discrimination, although it had little effect on the F-P discrimination.     

Asymmetry in the discrimination of quantity by rats: The role of the intertrial interval

In three experiments, rats were trained to discriminate between 20 and five (Exps. 1 and 2), or between 40 and five (Exp. 3), black squares. The squares were randomly distributed in the center of a white background and displayed on a computer screen. For one group, the patterns containing the higher quantity of squares signaled the delivery of sucrose (+), whilst patterns with the lower quantity of squares did not (–). For the second group, sucrose was signaled by the lower, but not by the higher, quantity of squares. In Experiment 1, the intertrial interval (ITI) was a white screen, and the 20+/5– discrimination was acquired more readily than the 5+/20– discrimination. For Experiment 2, the ITI was made up of 80 black squares on a white background. In this instance, the 5+/20– discrimination was acquired more successfully than the 20+/5– discrimination. In Experiment 3, two groups were trained with a 40+/5– discrimination, and two with a 5+/40– discrimination. For one group from each of these pairs, the training trials were separated by a white ITI, and the 40+/5– discrimination was acquired more readily than the 5+/40– discrimination. For the remaining two groups, the training trials were not separated by an ITI, and the two groups acquired the task at approximately the same rate. The results indicate that the cues present during the ITI play a role in the asymmetrical acquisition of magnitude discriminations based on quantity.     

Ordinal position in the serial learning of rats

Rats were runway trained on each of two, three-trial series consisting of different varieties of reward (X, Y, and Z) and nonreward (N) serving as trial outcomes. The two series are represented as XNY and ZNN. Distinguishing the two series were different brightness and texture cues on the runway floor. Transfer tests, conducted after the rats had developed faster running for rewarded trials than for nonrewarded trials and slower running on Trial 2 of ZNN than on Trial 2 of XNY, provided evidence that trial position, rather than item memories, was controlling the discriminations. In Experiment 1, reversing the floor cues completely reversed the discriminations. In Experiment 2, transfer to NNN did not change the routine patterns of approach that had been established.     

Feature-positive discriminations during a spatial-search task with humans

During feature-positive operant discriminations, a conditional cue, X, signals whether responses made during a second stimulus, A, are reinforced. Few studies have examined how landmarks, which can be trained to control the spatial distribution of responses during search tasks, might operate under conditional control. We trained college students to search for a target hidden on a computer monitor. Participants learned that responses to a hidden target location signaled by a landmark (e.g., A) would be reinforced only if the landmark was preceded by a colored background display (e.g., X). In Experiment 1, participants received feature-positive training (+←YB/ XA→+/A?/B?) with the hidden target to the right of A and to left of B. Responding during nonreinforced transfer test trials (XB?/YA?) indicated conditional control by the colored background, and spatial accuracy indicated a greater weighting of spatial information provided by the landmark than by the conditional cue. In Experiments 2a and 2b, the location of the target relative to landmark A was conditional on the colored background (+←YA/ XA→+/ ZB→+/ +←C /A?/B?). At test, conditional control and a greater weighting for the landmark’s spatial information were again found, but we also report evidence for spatial interference by the conditional stimulus. Overall, we found that hierarchical accounts best explain the observed differences in response magnitude, whereas spatial accuracy was best explained via spatial learning models that emphasize the reliability, stability, and proximity of landmarks to a target.     

Preweanling and adult rats treat conditioned light-tone combinations differently

Ontogenetic differences in processing light-tone compounds were discovered in preweanling (17-day-old) and adult (60–80-day-old) rats. Suppression of general activity was used as an index of the magnitude of conditioned fear following a single training session in which a CS+ was paired with mild footshock. In Experiment 1, rats were trained on discriminations in which the CS? consisted of a light and the CS+ was either a tone alone (simple discrimination) or a light-tone compound (simultaneous feature-positive discrimination). Adults and preweanlings given each type of discrimination were then tested for fear of the CS? and a target stimulus (tone alone or light-tone compound). Adults in all groups displayed greater fear of the target than of the CS?. Preweanlings, however, discriminated the CS? from the target only when the target was the same as the original CS+. Experiment 2 revealed that age-related differences in conventional stimulus generalization is not a likely explanation for the pattern of results found in Experiment 1. Experiment 3 revealed age-related differences in expressed fear of a serial feature-positive discrimination; adults, but not preweanlings, showed greater fear of the compound than of the CS?. Alternative interpretations of the results from these experiments are discussed, and the general conclusion is that adults appear more inclined to process elements of a compound stimulus selectively, whereas preweanlings seem more likely to process the compound unselectively, with roughly equivalent processing of each element.     

A feature positive effect in conditioned suppression

A conditioned suppression experiment with rats studied the development of two discriminations involving two conditioned stimuli, A and X. In one discrimination (AX+/A?), compound presentations of A and X signaled shock and presentations of A alone signaled no-shock. In the other discrimination (A+/AX?), A alone signaled shock and AX signaled no-shock. AX+/A? discriminations were learned more rapidly than their A+/AX? counterparts. These results, which resemble the feature-positive effect of Jenkins and Sainsbury (1969, 1970), are discussed in terms of Rescorla and Wagner’s (1972) theory of conditioning and also in terms of stimulus intensity mechanisms.     

Transfer of visual and haptic maze learning in rats

Cross-modal transfer of learning between black/white and rough/smooth discrimination tasks was studied in a two-choice maze procedure in which the stimuli for both discriminations were located on the floor of the maze. Rats were trained initially with cues of one modality and then given transfer training with cues of the second modality. The amount of transfer produced by two criteria of learning, 9 correct responses in 10 trials and 18 correct responses in 20 trials, was also studied. Bidirectional cross-modal transfer of learning was demonstrated more clearly with the more stringent learning criteria. These positive transfer effects appeared primarily to be the result of general transfer processes.     

An exploration of the feature-positive effect in adult humans

Experiment 1 compared the acquisition of a feature-positive and a feature-negative discrimination in humans. In the former, an outcome was signaled by two stimuli together, but not by one of these stimuli alone. In the latter, the outcome was signaled by one stimulus alone, but not by two stimuli together. Using a within-group design, the experiment revealed that the feature-positive discrimination was acquired more readily than the feature-negative discrimination. Experiment 2 tested an explanation for these results, based on the Rescorla-Wagner theory, by examining how novel discriminations, based on a combination of a feature-positive and a feature-negative discrimination, were solved. The results did not accord with predictions from the theory. Alternative explanations for the results are considered.     

Processing of complex auditory stimuli (tunes) by rats and monkeys (Cebus apella)

The degree to which rats and monkeys base their discriminations of complex auditory stimuli (“tunes”) on frequency contours rather than on local features was investigated. In Experiment 1, groups of rats and monkeys trained with tunes as S+ and S? acquired a simple operant discrimination no faster than groups that received the same notes of each tune but in a new random order on each trial; neither did the groups differ on two transfer tests devised to detect learning of frequency contour in the tune-trained animals. Acquisition in the tune-trained and random-notes groups seemed to be based on the overall frequency difference between S+ and S?, which was about 1.5 octaves. In Experiment 2, S+ and S? were similar to each other with regard to overall frequency and individual notes, the most salient differentiating characteristic of the tunes being their tonal pattern. The tune-trained groups were clearly superior to the random-notes animals in acquisition, and an initial transfer test suggested that the former might have learned the discrimination on the basis of frequency contour. However, the detailed transfer tests of Experiment 3 strongly suggested that the tune-trained rats and monkeys based their discriminations primarily on local cues rather than on frequency contour. Based on the results of Experiment 4, the data of an earlier study that suggested frequency contour learning in monkeys and rats were reinterpreted in terms of control by local cues.