Coding in pigeons: Multiple‐coding versus single‐code/default strategies

Pinto, Carlos; Machado, Armando

doi:10.1002/jeab.153

Cited by 12 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The birds were first divided in two groups, one that should have learned a single-code/default strategy to map three samples onto two comparisons, and one that should not (two samples and two comparisons). The three-sample group replicated Pinto and Machado's (2015) procedure and thereby checked the reliability of their findings. The results were similar, a strong preference for the "long" key (see Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pinto and Machado (2015) were interested in pigeons' coding strategies in asymmetrical matching-to-sample tasks. During training, the pigeons learned to map three samples (2 s, 6 s, and 18 s) onto two comparisons (red and green hues) such that one comparison-for example, Red-was correct following the 2-s samples and the other comparison, Green, was correct following both the 6-s and 18-s samples.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Pinto and Machado's (2015) experiment, the 30-s ITI was illuminated by the houselight, the sample was the center keylight, and the retention interval was spent in darkness. During training, the end of the ITI, signaled by the houselight offset, and the start of the sample, signaled by the center keylight onset, occurred simultaneously.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, if the sample offset was the "stop" time marker, and because no default "long" response rule was acquired, we would expect preference for the "short" key to increase with the retention interval (choose-short effect), or indifference between the two comparisons (Sherburne et al, 1998). As a replication, a second group of pigeons learned the same task as Pinto and Machado (2015), with three samples (2 s, 6 s, and 18 s) and two comparisons (red and green hues). After the retention tests, the two groups of pigeons switched tasks to determine whether differences in training could result in differences in coding that would affect performance on the tasks.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Unraveling sources of stimulus control in a temporal discrimination task

Pinto

Machado

2016

Learn Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In temporal discriminations tasks, more than one stimulus may function as a time marker. We studied two of them in a matching-to-sample task, the sample keylight and the houselight that signaled the intertrial interval (ITI). One group of pigeons learned a symmetrical matching-to-sample task with two samples (2 s or 18 s of a center keylight) and two comparisons (red and green side keys), whereas another group of pigeons learned an asymmetrical matching-to-sample task with three samples (2 s, 6 s, and 18 s) and two comparisons (red and green). In the asymmetrical task, 6-s and 18-s samples shared the same comparison. In a subsequent retention test, both groups showed a preference for the comparison associated with the longer samples, a result consistent with the hypothesis that pigeons based their choices on the duration elapsed since the offset of the houselight (i.e., sample duration + retention interval). Results from two no-sample tests further corroborated the importance of the ITI illumination as a time marker: When the ITI was illuminated, the proportion of choices correlated positively with the retention interval; when the ITI was darkened, choices fell to random levels. However, the absolute value of choice proportions suggested that the sample stimulus was also a time marker. How multiple stimuli acquire control over behavior and how they combine remains to be worked out.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Unraveling sources of stimulus control in a temporal discrimination task

Pinto

Machado

2016

Learn Behav

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, some data appears to go against this hypothesis. In the 3-sample, 2-comparison procedure mentioned in the previous paragraph, Pinto and Machado (2015) ran a generalization test where new sample durations were presented. If responding on no-sample (0 s) trials were controlled by stimulus generalization, performance on 0-s, 1-s, and 2-s trials should be similar.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Choice biases in no-sample and delay testing in pigeons (Columba livia)

Pinto

Sousa

2021

Anim Cogn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In experimental tasks that involve stimuli that vary along a quantitative continuum, some choice biases are commonly found. Take, for instance, a matching-to-sample task where animals must, following the presentation of sample stimuli (that differ in duration), choose between two or more comparison stimuli. In tests where no sample is presented there is usually a bias towards the comparison that is correct following the shortest sample. To examine some aspects of these choice biases, pigeons were trained in a symbolic matching-to-sample task with two durations of keylight as samples, where key pecking had to be maintained during sample presentation. Firstly, even though animals were required to attend to the sample, a preference for the "short" comparison in nosample testing was found. This result disproves an account where this effect was hypothesized to happen due to non-programmed learning resulting from the animals failing to attend to some trials. Secondly, even though a bias for "short" was found in both no-sample and delay testing, the extent of the biases differed between tasks, thus suggesting that forgetting the sample presented during a delay does not necessarily land the animal in a state similar to presenting no sample at all to begin with.

show abstract

Animal timing: a synthetic approach

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inspired by Spence's seminal work on transposition, we propose a synthetic approach to understanding the temporal control of operant behavior. The approach takes as primitives the temporal generalization gradients obtained in prototypical concurrent and retrospective timing tasks and then combines them to synthetize more complex temporal performances. The approach is instantiated by the learning-to-time (LeT) model. The article is divided into three parts. In the first part, we review the basic findings concerning the generalization gradients observed in fixed-interval schedules, the peak procedure, and the temporal generalization procedure and then describe how LeT explains them. In the second part, we use LeT to derive by gradient combination the typical performances observed in mixed fixed-interval schedules, the free-operant psychophysical procedure, the temporal bisection task, and the double temporal bisection task. We also show how the model plays the role of a useful null hypothesis to examine whether temporal control in the bisection task is relative or absolute. In the third part, we identify a set of issues that must be solved to advance our understanding of temporal control, including the shape of the generalization gradients outside the range of trained stimulus durations, the nature of temporal memories, the influence of context on temporal learning, whether temporal control can be inhibitory, and whether temporal control is also relational. These issues attest to the heuristic value of a Spencean approach to temporal control.

show abstract

Coding in pigeons: Multiple‐coding versus single‐code/default strategies

Cited by 12 publications

References 20 publications

Unraveling sources of stimulus control in a temporal discrimination task

Unraveling sources of stimulus control in a temporal discrimination task

Choice biases in no-sample and delay testing in pigeons (Columba livia)

Animal timing: a synthetic approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About