Feature-Positive and Feature-Negative Learning in the Rhesus Monkey and Pigeon

Pace, Gary M.; McCoy, D. F.; Nallan, Gary B.

doi:10.2307/1422721

Cited by 26 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is clear that at least some species in a variety of vertebrate groups can solve both feature-positive and featurenegative problems. These groups include primates (Pace et al, 1980), rodents (Crowell and Bernhardt, 1979) and birds (Jenkins and Sainsbury, 1969).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is, discrimination problems in which the response was based on the presence of a feature (feature-positive) were learned rapidly, whereas discrimination problems where the response was based on the absence of a feature (feature-negative) were learned slowly and subjects reached poorer performance levels. The feature-positive effect (superiority of feature-positive over feature-negative learning) has been found to occur in pigeons (Jenkins and Sainsbury, 1969), rats (Crowell and Bernhardt, 1979), monkeys (Pace et al, 1980) and even humans (Neisser, 1963;Sainsbury, 1971;Newman et al, 1980;Healy, 1981).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Feature-positive and feature-negative learning in honey bees

Abramson

Çakmak

Duell

et al. 2012

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYHoney bees (Apis mellifera anatolica) were subjected to sequential trials where they were given the choice between a featurepositive and a feature-negative feeding plate. The ʻfeatureʼ being manipulated is the presence of a single blue circle among three circles marking the location of a small sucrose reward. That is, a ʻfeature-negativeʼ target had three white circles, while a ʻfeature-positiveʼ target had two white circles and one blue one. Two experiments were performed. In both experiments, each bee was tested under two different reward scenarios (treatments). In the first experiment, during the feature-positive treatment bees received 4μl of 2moll -1 sucrose when choosing the feature-positive plate, but received 4μl of saturated NaCl solution (saltwater) when choosing the feature-negative plate. During the feature-negative treatment, bees were rewarded when visiting the featurenegative plate, while visitation to the feature-positive plate only offered bees the saltwater. The second experiment was a repeat of the first except that pure water was offered instead of saltwater in the non-rewarding feeding plate. As an experimental control, a set of bees was offered sequential trials where both the feature-positive and feature-negative plates offered the sucrose reward. Bee feeding plate choice differed between the feature-positive and feature-negative treatments in both experiments. Bees favored the feeding plate type with the sucrose reward in each treatment, and never consumed the saltwater or pure water when encountered in either treatment. Further, behavior of bees during both the feature-positive and feature-negative treatments differed from that of control bees. However, neither feature-positive nor feature-negative learning reached high levels of success. Further, a feature-positive effect was seen when pure water was offered; bees learned to solve the feature-positive problem more rapidly. When we tested bees using simply the choice of blue versus white targets, where one color held the sucrose reward and the other the saltwater, a beeʼs fidelity to the color offering the sucrose reward quickly reached very high levels.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feature-positive and feature-negative learning in honey bees

Abramson

Çakmak

Duell

et al. 2012

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The FPE has also been established with a variety of responses and reinforcers, and across a wide variety of subject populations, including rats (Reberg & LeClerc, 1977), pigeons (Jenkins & Sainsbury, 1969, 1970, monkeys (McCoy & Yanko, 1983;Pace, McCoy, & Nallan, 1980), human children (Sainsbury, 1971), and adults (Newman, Wolff, & Hearst, 1980). The wide generality of the phenomenon, as well as the demonstration of the FPE in humans, has caused speculation that the FPE may not reflect learned response tendencies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The ontogeny of the feature-positive effect in young chicks

Miller

McDougall

Zolman

1988

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The wide generality of the feature-positive effect (FPE) has caused speculation that the FPE may represent innate biases in the stimulus control of discriminative responding. There is little experimental evidence to date ragarding this possibility. In the present study, 1-or 4-day-old chicks were trained on a feature-positive (FP) or feature-negative (FN) discrimination with heat reinforcement. After the acquisition phase, these subjects received extinction training followed by a reacquisition phase. The FP performance was superior to the FN performance in both age groups. Extinction resulted in improved discrimination performance in both the FP and FN conditions. Unmasking ofFN learning by the extinction treatment suggests that the FPE represents a deficit in performance, rather than an inability to learn the FN task. These data demonstrate that adult-like performance on feature discriminations is evident as early as the first day post-hatch.Jenkins and Sainsbury (1969, 1970) found that the ability of pigeons to learn a visual discrimination between two stimulus displays was dependent on whether the distinguishing feature appeared on reinforced (S+ ) or nonreinforced (S-) trials. When the feature appeared on S+ trials (the feature-positive, or FP, condition), the discrimination was learned readily. However, when the feature appeared on S-trials (the feature-negative, or FN, condition), the discrimination was learned with difficulty, if at all. This superiority of FP performance relative to FN performance is referred to as the feature-positive effect (FPE). A more detailed analysis of response patterns during S+ trials indicates that FP subjects respond directly at the feature, whereas FN subjects direct response toward background cues present on both S+ and S-trials (referred to as the "common" element). Thus, this tendency to respond to or "track" the best predictor of reinforcement results in excellent FP discrimination performance and marginal FN performance.Recent evidence (Hearst, 1984(Hearst, , 1987 indicates that subjects manifesting poor FN performance may have actually learned the discrimination. Following initial FN discrimination training, subjects were given sessions of extinction in which responding to S+ or S-was not reinforced. Surprisingly, the subjects demonstrated a dramatic

show abstract

“…These strong position preferences may explain why the positive and negative tracking observed here were not as robust as those typically seen in the positive reinforcement situation (cf. Pace, McCoy, & Nallan, 1980). The tracking data may also have implications which extend beyond the mere demonstration of an FPE produced by negative reinforcement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, FPEs have been obtained with monkeys pressing three-panel arrays (Pace, McCoy, & Nallan, 1980), with rats pressing illuminated disks (Crowell & Bernhardt, 1979), and with cats using tone stimuli (Diamond & Goldberg, 1962). FPEs have also been reported with children (Sainsbury, 1971) and with adults (Newman, Wolf, & Hearst, 1980).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Feature-positive and feature-negative discrimination learning maintained by negative reinforcement in rhesus monkeys

McCoy

Yanko

1983

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rhesus monkeys were trained to press panels to escape or avoid shock. Escape and avoidance training were combined factorially with feature-positive (FP) and feature-negative (FN) discriminations. In the FP situation, S+ trials were characterized by one red and two green panel displays and S-consisted of an all green panel array. In the FN arrangement, S+ and S-arrays were reversed. When compared properly, FP discriminations were learned more readily than FN discriminations in both escape and avoidance training conditions. Positive tracking was associated with FP discriminations, and feature avoidance characterized the FN tasks. These data suggest that in primates, feature responses (i.e., tracking behaviors) are more a function of the operant contingency than of the Pavlovian correlation.An interesting phenomenon in the area of discrimination learning, and one which has attracted increasing amounts of experimental attention, is the featurepositive effect, FPE, first described by Jenkins and Sainsbury (1969). Consider a go/no-go problem in which an animal is required to differentiate between a white stimulus and a white stimulus with a dot superimposed on it. Whether the subject learns the discrimination is apparently a function of which of these stimuli is designated as S+ and which is S-. If the animal is reinforced for responding to the stimulus containing the dot, or feature, but reinforcement is not available for responding to the blank white key, the condition is labeled feature positive (FP), and discrimination learning appears rapidly. However, in the reverse arrangement, in which the stimulus containing the feature appears exclusively as S-and the blank white stimulus appears as S+, learning is considerably more difficult. As a matter of fact, this feature-negative (FN) task is frequently characterized by a complete absence of learning. It is this asymmetry in learning FP discriminations relative to FN discriminations which constitutes the FPE.

show abstract

Feature-Positive and Feature-Negative Learning in the Rhesus Monkey and Pigeon

Cited by 26 publications

References 13 publications

Feature-positive and feature-negative learning in honey bees

Feature-positive and feature-negative learning in honey bees

The ontogeny of the feature-positive effect in young chicks

Feature-positive and feature-negative discrimination learning maintained by negative reinforcement in rhesus monkeys

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About