Stimulus control in a discrimination based on a distinctive feature

Six pigeons were instrumentally trained to discriminate between two displays that differed only by the presence of a distinctive feature on the positive or food-correlated display. In accordance with previous studies, subjects learned the discrimination and, in the presence of the positive display, directed most of their responses to the distinctive feature, although responses to the common feature were also reinforced. Subsequent generalization tests revealed that on the positive display, both common and distinctive features produced decremental gradients, contradicting Farthing's (1971) statement that the common feature acquires a control function opposite that of the distinctive feature. Procedural differences probably caused the discrepancy in results; within a display, Farthing presented common and distinctive features successively; the present study used simultaneous presentations of common and distinctive stimuli

Control by the auditory or the visual element of a compound discriminative stimulus: effects of feedback.

Groups of pigeons were trained to depress a treadle in the presence of a compound stimulus consisting of a tone and a red houselight (a) to avoid electric shock, or (b) to obtain grain. Immediate, exteroceptive feedback was equated for avoidance and appetitive groups within an experiment, but varied across experiments from elevation of a nonilluminated feeder to darkening of the chamber, termination of the tone, and elevation of an illuminated feeder. Responding in the absence of the compound stimulus postponed its next occurrence. After performance had stabilized, the degree to which each element controlled treadle pressing was determined. Generally, in the appetitive tests, the red light controlled much more responding than did the tone, but in the avoidance tests, the tone controlled more responding than did the red light

Signalled and unsignalled free-operant avoidance in the pigeon

Pigeons were trained to depress a lever to avoid electric shock under free-operant avoidance schedules without a warning signal, or with a warning signal that could be terminated only by a response. Most birds in the signalled avoidance procedure terminated more than 50% of the warning signals before shock. In the unsignalled avoidance procedure, several birds formed a temporal discrimination and received relatively few shocks; other birds responded only in post-shock bursts, and received many more shocks

Facilitation of food-reinforced responding by a signal for response-independent food

Five pigeons whose key pecking was maintained by 4-sec access to grain on a variable-interval 2-min schedule received Pavlovian differential conditioning trials superimposed upon the instrumental baseline. The conditioned stimuli were changes in the stimulus on the key from white to red, or to a white horizontal line against a dark background. The positive conditioned stimulus was 20 sec long, and was followed immediately by 8-sec access to grain. The negative conditioned stimulus, also 20 sec long, was never paired with response-independent food. All pigeons responded more rapidly in the presence of the positive conditioned stimulus than in the presence of the negative one. The positive conditioned stimulus produced an increase in response rate over the pre-conditioned stimulus period. The negative conditioned stimulus had no marked effect upon response rate. When the roles of the positive and negative stimuli were reversed, and the duration of the response-independent reinforcement was reduced to 4 sec, the new positive conditioned stimulus came to facilitate responding, and the new negative conditioned stimulus no longer produced facilitation. A second discrimination reversal produced similar outcomes. When a third reversal was initiated, and the duration of response-independent reinforcement was reduced to 2 sec, the difference between the effects of the positive and negative stimuli diminished