Pigeons were exposed to stimuli correlated with the presence or absence of a variable-interval 60-second schedule of reinforcement only while they depressed a crossbar or "perch." In the first experiment, the stimuli were different tilts of a line displayed on the key. When the difference in brightness between the line and the background (salience) was maximal, seven of eight birds acquired the discrimination, but when the difference was reduced by 50%, only one succeeded. In the second experiment, wavelength of chamber illumination served as the relevant dimension. Neither experiment showed a large effect attributable to the magnitude of the difference (disparity) between the positive and the negative stimulus. Individual differences in time spent observing were positively correlated with level of discrimination in the presence of the stimuli. All birds produced the positive stimulus for a greater proportion of the available time than they did the negative stimulus. This may be the mechanism that provides selective reinforcement of observing. Finally, the formation of a discrimination was analyzed in terms of changes in the proportion of time spent in contact with the discriminative stimuli.

No abstract

In Experiment 1, depressing one perch produced stimuli indicating which of two keys, if pecked, could produce food (spatial information) and depressing the other perch produced stimuli indicating whether a variable-interval or an extinction schedule was operating (temporal information). The pigeons increased the time they spent depressing the perch that produced the temporal information but did not increase the time they spent depressing the perch that produced the spatial information. In Experiment 2, pigeons that were allowed to produce combined spatial and temporal information did not acquire the perch pressing any faster or maintain it at a higher level than pigeons allowed to produce only temporal information. Later, when perching produced only spatial information, the time spent depressing the perch eventually declined. The results are not those implied by the statement that information concerning biologically important events is reinforcing but are consistent with an interpretation in terms of the acquisition of reinforcing properties by a stimulus associated with a higher density of primary reinforcement.

No abstract

Chinchillas and pigeons were used as subjects in separate experiments to study interactions among stimulus and response characteristics in discrimination learning. Both the stimuli and the responses could differ with respect to their "quality" and their "location." Bright versus dim lights and upper versus lower lights served as the stimulus qualities and stimulus locations for the chinchillas, respectively. Red versus green lights and upper versus lower lights served as the stimulus qualities and stimulus locations for the pigeons, respectively. Respond versus norespond and respond-left versus respond-right served as the response qualities and response locations, for both species, respectively. In both experiments, response-quality performance was superior when the discriminative stimuli differed in quality than when they differed in location, whereas response-location performance was superior when the discriminative stimuli differed in location than when they differed in quality. These results were interpreted within the framework provided by a general law of learning, that is, the "quality-location hypothesis."A number of researchers have taken the demonstrations of various so-called "biological constraints on learning" as calling into question the assumption that general laws of learning and/or behavior can be formulated (