Effects of altering outcome expectancies on pigeons' delayed conditional discrimination performance

Peterson, Gail B.; Trapold, Milton A.

doi:10.1016/0023-9690(80)90001-6

Cited by 185 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When u n ique outcomes were a rra nged i n the cond itiona l discriminative choice task, empirical data supported the notion that a unique outcome expectancy was formed for each unique outcome (e.g., Peterson & Trapold, 1980;Peterson, Wheeler, & Armstrong, 1978). Trapold and Overmier (1972) presumed unique outcome expectancies to form part of the particular discriminative stimulus complex of the discrimination task.…”

Section: The Differential Outcomes Effect and The Concept Of Outcome mentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Trapold and Overmier (1972) presumed unique outcome expectancies to form part of the particular discriminative stimulus complex of the discrimination task. They further suggested that these outcome-specific expectancies have functional stimulus-like properties that can serve as a reliable cue to guide and mediate subsequent choice behavior, a suggestion that received empirical support (e.g., Kruse, Overmier, Konz, & Rokke, 1983;Peterson & Trapold, 1980). This view contrasts with the earlier two-process view that mediation by unique outcome expectancies simply provides the discriminative stimulus with general motivational properties (viz., Rescorla & Solomon, 1967).…”

Section: The Differential Outcomes Effect and The Concept Of Outcome mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Unique Outcome Expectations as a Training and Pedagogical Tool

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In everyday life, many of our behaviors are learned and reinforced through the availability of rewarding consequences. We work to be rewarded with desirable outcomes, and different people work for different rewards. Many of us have fond memories of our favorite teacher sticking a fancy star on an assignment well done and of how we would look forward to these stickers.A key aspect of real life is that we are constantly challenged with decisions to make and, almost without exception, every choice comes with a consequence. Very often, such consequences are unique to the particular choices we have made given the presenting problems. For example, when we want specialty coffee, we learn that we can get some at Starbucks. But

show abstract

Section: The Differential Outcomes Effect and The Concept Of Outcome mentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: The Differential Outcomes Effect and The Concept Of Outcome mentioning

confidence: 99%

Unique Outcome Expectations as a Training and Pedagogical Tool

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The lack of sample-specific behavior during the baseline delays of testing argues against the possibility that the interpolated VI-associated stimulus reduced matching accuracy by interfering with samplespecific mediating behavior. However, it is clear that some component of the VI-associated stimulus is responsibleperhaps the high rate of keypecking it occasioned, or perhaps an expectancy for food aroused by the VIassociated stimulus (Delong & Wasserman, 1981;Peterson & Trapold, 1980).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of interpolated stimuli in the retroactive interference of pigeon short-term memory

Kendrick

Rilling

1984

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theoretical accounts of retroactive interference in delayed matching-to-sample attribute decrements in performance to disruption of rehearsal or retrieval of a sample stimulus representation or an instruction of which test stimulus to peck. However, only two sources of retroactive interference have been identified so far: changes in illumination and electric shock. The present experiments sought evidence of additional sources of retroactive interference. Stimuli associated with variable interval (Vl), extinction (EXT), and differential reinforcement of other behavior (DRO) schedules were interpolated into the delays of delayed matching. The results of three experiments demonstrated that a stimulus associated with a VI schedule of reinforcement interferes with delayed matching but that an EXT-associated stimulus does not. Experiment 2 showed that a DRO-associated stimulus interferes with delayed matching. Additional analysis indicated that interference with delayed matching was a function of the degree to which the interpolated stimuli disrupted delay-interval behavior associated with accurate matching. These findings support the behavioral-context hypothesis, which states that response-produced stimuli arising from delay behavior provide the context necessary for accurate matching. Retroactive interference thus occurs to the extent that interpolated stimuli interfere with baseline delay behavior. 391Short-term memory in animals has been extensively studied in the delayed matching-to-sample paradigm. The successive delayed matching procedure is composed of four successive events: presentation ofthe sample stimulus, a delay interval, presentation of the test stimulus, and an intertrial interval. Responses during the test stimulus are correct or incorrect, that is, reinforced or not, conditional upon the relation between the previously presented sample stimulus and the current test stimulus (Wasserman, 1976). The task for the animal is to remember at the time of the test stimulus information based on the sample stimulus.Retroactive interference may be produced by interpolating events into the delay period. Retroactive interference is observed when matching accuracy on the interpolated test trials declines relative to matching accuracy on the baseline trials

show abstract

“…One example is what Peterson and Trapold (1980) call the "differential outcomes effect" in conditional discrimination (for a review, see Goeters, Blakely & Poling, 1992). In a conditional discrimination, different stimuli indicate which of two responses will be reinforced; the differential outcomes effect is that learning is faster if the outcomes of the two responses are different, for example if they involve different reinforcers (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A stimulus-location effect in contingency-governed, but not rule-based, discrimination learning.

Meier¹,

Lea²,

McLaren³

2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cogniti

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We tested pigeons' acquisition of a conditional discrimination task between colored grating stimuli that included choosing 1 of 2 response keys, which either appeared as white keys to the left and right of the discriminative stimulus, or were replicas of the stimulus. Pigeons failed to acquire the discrimination when the response keys were white disks but succeeded when directly responding to a replica of the stimulus. These results highlight how conditioning processes shape learning in pigeons: The results can be accounted for by supposing that, when pigeons were allowed to respond directly toward the stimulus, learning was guided by classical conditioning, but that responding to white keys demanded instrumental learning, which impaired task acquisition for pigeons. In contrast, humans completing the same paradigm showed no differential learning success depending on whether figure or position indicated the correct key. However, only participants who could state the underlying discrimination rule acquired the task, which implies that human performance in this situation relied on the deduction and application of task rules instead of associative processes.

show abstract

Effects of altering outcome expectancies on pigeons' delayed conditional discrimination performance

Cited by 185 publications

References 13 publications

Unique Outcome Expectations as a Training and Pedagogical Tool

Unique Outcome Expectations as a Training and Pedagogical Tool

The role of interpolated stimuli in the retroactive interference of pigeon short-term memory

A stimulus-location effect in contingency-governed, but not rule-based, discrimination learning.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About