Two-choice conditional discrimination performance of pigeons as a function of reward expectancy,prechoice delay,and domesticity

In a discrete-trial two-choice conditional discrimination task, pigeons which received food for a correct choice following the presentation of one cue and water for a correct choice following another cue performed better than pigeons which received food and water equally often in both cases when delays of several seconds intervened between the conditional cue and choice stimuli presentations. These results suggest that feedback properties of reinforcer-specific expectancies can be important in conditional discrimination learning in pigeons. An additional finding was that wild-caught pigeons regularly exhibited a higher percentage of correct choices than domestic subjects.     

Factors affecting conditional discrimination learning by pigeons: II. Physical and temporal characteristics of stimuli

Four experiments were performed to determine the stimulus characteristics that favor the development of conditional stimulus control in the single reversal paradigm with pigeon subjects. In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained on a successive discrimination between tone frequencies ranging from 350 to 3500 Hz in a particular houselight context condition (houselight-on or -off). The subjects then were trained on the reversal of the tone discrimination in the alternative context. Subsequent tone-frequency generalization testing in the two contexts indicated that they had failed to gain conditional control over the pigeons’ discriminative performance. Such control was obtained in Experiment 2, in which the two problems were alternated daily for 32 sessions of training. The gradients then peaked at the appropriate S+ value in each context. In Experiment 3, the key colors (blue vs. red) served as contexts while pigeons learned a successive discrimination in which the discriminative cues were houselight-on versus houselight-off conditions. This was followed by a reversal of the discrimination in the alternative key-color context condition. The key colors were effective conditional cues in this situation. In a previous experiment (Thomas, McKelvie, & Mah, 1985), key color had been ineffective as a conditional cue when the discriminative cues were lines superimposed on the colored background. In Experiment 4, key color was effective when the color and lines were presented on a single key as in the earlier experiment, but were sequenced such that the onset of the key color preceded and then overlapped the presentation of the lines. We concluded that conditional discriminations are easiest for pigeons when visual cues are used, but the conditional and discriminative cues must be presented in such a way that they do not combine to form a psychological compound.     

Pigeons’ short-term memory for temporal and visual stimuli in delayed matching-to-sample

In the present experiment, we compared directly pigeons’ short-term memory of temporal and visual stimuli in a delayed matching-to-sample task. The sample stimuli consisted of red and green lights presented for 5 and 30 sec, followed by a retention interval and blue and yellow comparisons. For subjects in the visual group, duration was irrelevant and the color of the sample was the conditional cue. For animals in the temporal group, color was irrelevant and duration of the sample was the conditional stimulus. The results showed that acquisition of the matching task was faster and accuracy was higher in the visual than in the temporal group. More importantly, memory of either sample generally declined at a similar rate when the duration of the retention interval was increased and when the intertrial interval was reduced. Taken together, the results indicate that with 1–8-sec retention intervals, short-term memory for temporal stimuli is similar to that found with color-visual samples. The findings are discussed in terms of retrospective and prospective processing.     

A comparison of the short-term memory performances of pigeons and jackdaws

Two experiments employed a delayed conditional discrimination procedure in which half the trials began with the presentation of food and half with no food; following a retention interval, subjects were presented with a choice between red and green keys, a response to one of which was reinforced according to whether the trial had started with food or no food. In Experiment 1, after 38 training sessions during which the retention interval was gradually increased, pigeons performed at a moderate level with intervals of 5 to 7.5 sec. A final test produced a steep forgetting function for food trials, but not for no-food trials; performance was unaffected by the duration of the intertriai interval (10 or 40 sec). Experiment 2 used the delayed conditional discrimination procedure to compare short-term memory in jackdaws (Corvus monedulus) with that in pigeons. Although the performance of the jackdaws was below that of the pigeons at the start of training, they showed more rapid learning over long delays, and, in the final test, a shallower forgetting function for food trials than that shown by pigeons. The results suggested superior short-term memory in jackdaws, which may help to explain the better performance of corvids in general when compared with that of pigeons in certain complex learning tasks.     

Attentional changes in blocking are not a consequence of lateral inhibition

In three human causal learning experiments, we examined attentional modulation in the blocking task, in which participants typically learn little about a novel cue B when it is paired with a previously trained, predictive cue A. Evidence indicates that this blocking training led to a decrement in attention to the blocked cue B. The present experiments addressed whether this decrease in attention to the blocked cue could be better explained as being due to lateral inhibition from the pretrained cue A to the blocked cue B, or as a cue-specific property that is not conditional on the presence or absence of other stimuli. Strong effects of learned predictiveness were observed on participants’ causal judgments (Experiment 1) and choice behavior (Experiments 2 and 3). However, no evidence for lateral inhibitory processes emerged in any of the experiments, despite explicit attempts to maximize experimental sensitivity to this effect. The results are discussed in the context of formal models of the operation of attentional processes in human and animal learning.     

Delayed discriminations in the pigeon: The role of within-trial location of conditional cues

Four pigeons were trained in a delayed conditional discrimination in which color and line cues jointly indicated trial outcome. These were either combined in advance of a retention interval (RI) or separately presented before and after the RI. The former procedure resulted in less forgetting over the RI, the difference increasing with longer RIs. In a second study, the line cue was presented redundantly before and after the RI, and then selectively omitted from either temporal location during probe tests. In general, the results indicated that the birds relied upon the line as a cue to a greater extent when it was compounded with the color in advance of the RI than when it was presented after the RI. The data support an interpretation based on anticipatory processing in working memory, which leads to better retention than retrospective remembering.     

Directed forgetting effects in pigeons: Remember cues initiate rehearsal

Pigeons were trained in a two-choice delayed matching-to-sample task with red and green hues. A brief postsample cue (a vertical or horizontal line) signaled whether the comparison stimuli would be presented or omitted on each trial. Comparison stimuli were always presented following the remember-cue (R-cue) trial, but never following the forget-cue (F-cue) and no-cue trials. In Experiment 1, matching accuracy on F-cue and no-cue trials was equivalent and was considerably inferior to accuracy on R-cue trials. In Experiment 2, the placement of the postsample cue was manipulated. Matching accuracy decreased as the R cue was delayed in the retention interval, but performance in the F-cue condition was not affected. These data indicate that the no-cue condition can function as an implicit F cue and that the R cue can function to initiate and maintain rehearsal.     

Emergent relations in pigeons following training with temporal samples

In two experiments, we investigated emergent conditional relations in pigeons using a symbolic matching-to-sample task with temporal stimuli as the samples and hues as the comparisons. Both experiments comprised three phases. In Phase I, pigeons learned to choose a red keylight (R) but not a green keylight (G) after a 1-s signal. They also learned to choose G but not R after a 4-s signal. In Phase II, correct responding consisted of choosing a blue keylight (B) after a 4-s signal and a yellow keylight (Y) after a 16-s signal. Comparisons G and B were both related to the same 4-s sample, whereas comparisons R and Y had no common sample. In Phase III, R and G were presented as samples, and B and Y were presented as the comparisons. The choice of B was correct following G, and the choice of Y was correct following R. If a relation between comparisons that shared a common sample were to emerge, then responding to B given G would be more likely than responding to Y given R. The results were generally consistent with this prediction, suggesting, for the first time in pigeons, the emergence of novel relations that involve temporal stimuli as nodal samples.     

Pigeons’ discrimination of color proportion in computer-generated visual displays

Pigeons were trained to discriminate the proportion of red to green color in paired stimulus displays. Initially, the stimuli were horizontal bars composed of continuous blocks of color that varied from being all red versus all green to .5 proportions of these two colors. Discrimination accuracy decreased as a function of the disparity in the proportions of the two colors. This relationship was maintained when the stimulus configurations were altered in various ways. Tests with horizontal bars indicated that the pigeons could utilize differences in the lengths (or areas) of one of the colors when choosing between stimuli. They did not rely only on this type of cue to assess proportion disparities but rather on multiple stimulus parameters. Also, the form of the discrimination function suggests that the pigeons distinguished ratio differences, so that Weber’s law applies to this type of discrimination.     

Relational learning in pigeons: The role of perceptual processes in between-key recognition of complex stimuli

In Experiment 1, we used six procedures in a series of unsuccessful attempts to obtain relational learning using trial-unique pictorial stimuli in pigeons. The Experiment began by testing conventional (three-key) matching-to-sample (MTS) and nonmatching-to-sample (NMTS); in subsequent stages of the experiment we progressively incorporated features of techniques that do obtain relational learning in a single-key apparatus. In Experiment 2, we found that acquisition of NMTS using pictorial stimuli proceeded no more rapidly than acquisition of a conditional discrimination. Experiment 3 showed that acquisition of NMTS was more rapid than acquisition of MTS when plain colored stimuli were used, but not when pictorial stimuli were used. These three experiments suggest that pigeons do not recognize pictorial stimuli shown on different keys. In Experiment 4, between-key recognition was obtained with familiar but not with novel pictorial stimuli. It is argued that perceptual learning facilitates the detection of the between-key identity of complex stimuli, and that perceptual processes may underlie the difficulty in demonstrating relational learning in pigeons.     

Flexible coding of temporal information by pigeons: Event durations as remember and forget cues for temporal samples

The ability of pigeons to use event durations as remember (R) and forget (F) cues for temporal samples was examined. Pigeons were required to indicate whether a houselight sample stimulus was short (2 sec) or long (6 sec) by pecking a red or a green comparison stimulus. After training with a constant 10-sec delay interval, temporal cues (illumination of the center key) were presented 2 sec after the offset of the temporal samples. For one group, a short (2-sec) temporal cue served as the R cue and a long (6-3ec) temporal cue served as the F cue. This was reversed for a second group of birds. During training, comparison stimuli were always presented following the temporal R cue, but never following the temporal F cue. Tests for the effectiveness of the temporal R and F cues showed that F cues were equally effective in reducing matching accuracy in both groups of birds. It was concluded that pigeons used the duration of the cue to determine whether or not to rehearse the memory code for the temporal sample.     

Taste potentiates color-sickness associations in pigeons and quail

The present experiments assessed cue utilization in pigeons and quail on similar tests of poison-based aversion learning. In Experiments 1 and 2, three groups of pigeons were given colored water, flavored water, or colored flavored water prior to induction of sickness; these experiments differed only as to the specific colors and flavors used as stimuli. In both experiments, the birds trained with flavored water exhibited reliable taste aversions when tested with uncolored flavored water. Similar degrees of aversion were observed whether the flavored water had been colored or uncolored during training, suggesting that the color cue had little or no effect on the conditioning of the flavor cue. In contrast, the flavor cue had a pronounced effect on the conditioning of the color cue. When tested with unflavored colored water, the birds trained with colored flavored water exhibited significantly stronger color aversions than those trained with unflavored colored water. That is, the flavor cue enhanced or potentiated the conditioning of the color cue. In a third experiment, quail were trained in the same way as the pigeons with virtually the same result. The pattern of cue utilization observed in the present experiments with pigeons and quail differs markedly from that proposed by Wilcoxon, Dragoin, and Kral (1971) for quail. However, a reexamination of the results obtained by Wilcoxon et al. suggested that they are susceptible to an alternative interpretation consistent with the present results.     

Sustained attention: Stimulus control determined by schedule of cue production interacting with cue duration

In a study of sustained attention (“vigilance”), pigeons performed a conditional discrimination in a 3-key operant chamber. Pecking a white center key initiated a 0.2- or 2.0-sec cue (a red or green disk). The side keys then displayed white disks, and a peck on the right or left key was reinforced depending on whether the preceding cue was red or green. Pecks on the white center key initiated the cue according to one of two schedules of cue production (FR 1 or VI 7.5 sec). Control of side key choices by 0.2-sec cues was disturbed by transition from FR 1 to VI 7.5, and recovered after the schedule of cue production changed from VI 7.5 back to FR 1. Control of choices by 2.0-sec cues was not affected by changing schedules of cue production. Rates of pecking the cue were higher than rates of cue-producing responses.     

Representation strength in pigeon short-term memory: Effect of delay training

An attempt was madeto manipulate the strength of internal stimulus representations by exposing pigeons to brief delays between sample offset and comparison onset in a delayed conditional discrimination. In Experiment 1, pigeons were first trained on delayed conditional discrimination with either short (0.5-sec) delays or no delays. When delays were increased by 2.0 sec, birds trained with a delay performed at a higher level than did birds trained with no delays. In Experiment 2, subjects were first trained on a delayed simple discrimination. Following a circle stimulus, responses to a white key were reinforced; however, following a dot stimulus, responses to the white key were not reinforced. The pigeons were then trained on a delayed conditional discrimination involving hue samples and line-orientation comparisons with differential outcomes. Choice of vertical following red yielded food; choice of horizontal following green yielded no food. Mixed delays were then introduced to birds in Group Delay, whereas birds in the control group received overtraining. When tested on a delayed simple discrimination with hue stimuli (red and green initial stimuli followed by white response stimulus), pigeons in Group Delay tended to perform at a higher level than did birds in the control group (i.e., although the birds in both groups responded more following red than following green, birds in Group Delay did this to a greater extent than did birds in the control group). Thus, experience with delays appears to strengthen stimulus representations established during training.     

Contrasting predictive and causal values of predictors and of causes

Three experiments examined human processing of stimuli as predictors and causes. In Experiments 1A and 1B, two serial events that both preceded a third were assessed as predictors and as causes of the third event. Instructions successfully provided scenarios in which one of the serial (target) stimuli was viewed as a strong predictor but as a weak cause of the third event. In Experiment 2, participants’ preexperimental knowledge was drawn upon in such a way that two simultaneous antecedent events were processed as predictors or causes, which strongly influenced the occurrence of overshadowing between the antecedent events. Although a tendency toward overshadowing was found between predictors, reliable overshadowing was observed only between causes, and then only when the test question was causal. Together with other evidence in the human learning literature, the present results suggest that predictive and causal learning obey similar laws, but there is a greater susceptibility to cue competition in causal than predictive attribution.     

Conditioned reinforcement and complex discrimination: Can conditioned reinforcing value be specific to a complex of three cues?

The present experiment is concerned with the nature of the cues that might acquire conditioned reinforcing value, and the ways in which such cues might interact with one another. Red and green colored keylights were differentially paired with food dependent upon the houselight context (A or B) and the trial type (training or choice/forced). The duration of the colored keylights was varied between groups in an attempt to manipulate the effectiveness of the short-term memory of trial-type cues at the trial’s end. The red and green stimuli were of 30 sec duration for Group 30 and of 3 sec duration for Group 3. The results indicated that the choices of the pigeons in Group 30 were influenced by the houselight context present and by the keylight color. The choices of the pigeons in Group 3 seemed to be influenced by the houselight context present, the keylight color, and the memory of trial-type cues. Memory cues for trial antecedents were not overshadowed by presumably more salient external houselight stimuli for the pigeons in Group 3. Two alternative explanations for the results are discussed, and determined to be unlikely based on the results of an earlier experiment. The present results are related to a model of the conditioned reinforcing value of momentary stimuli and of transmission of conditioned reinforcing value.     

Control of pigeons’ keypecking by the left-right arrangement of stimuli

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.     

Enhancement of pigeons’ conditional discrimination performance by expectancies of reinforcement and nonreinforcement

Prior work has shown that when the separate correct responses of a conditional discrimination are followed by different reinforcing outcomes, performance is enhanced relative to that obtained under the conventional, single-reinforcer procedure. Four experiments with pigeons yielded the analogous finding when the different outcomes were reinforcement and explicit nonreinforcement. Controls indicated that the results could not be attributed to the effects of intermittent reinforcement, to possible differences in cue duration, or to a variety of potential sources of conditioned reinforcement. An interpretation in terms of expectancy learning is proposed.     

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.     

Directed forgetting in pigeons: Analysis of cue functions

In delayed matching-to-sample with pigeons, brief postsample cues signaled different trial outcomes. The normal comparison stimuli followed the cue to remember (R cue). In the comparison-omission procedure, comparison stimuli and reinforcement were omitted following the cue to forget (F cue). In the comparison-substitution procedure, comparison stimuli were replaced by a single stimulus and reinforcement for a single response following the F cue. Infrequent probe trials revealed that F cues disrupted matching, with the amount of accuracy loss dependent on the length of the cue-comparison delay. These results, however, were found only with the comparison-omission procedure (Experiment 1). Replacing the comparison stimuli with another simultaneous (unconditional) discrimination revealed no accuracy loss in F-cue probes (Experiment 2), even though choice latencies were again lengthened by F cues. These results suggest that, while the F cue interferes with performance at the time of a retention test by slowing choices, it also interferes with sample retention. Alternative models of the cuing effect and its apparent dependence on end-of-trial reward are outlined.