2004
DOI: 10.3758/bf03196043
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Processing of empty and filled time intervals in pigeons

Abstract: Pigeons were trained initially with 2-and 8-sec empty or filled intervals as sample stimuli. Interval onset and termination was signaled by 1-sec start and stop markers. Following retention and psychophysical testing, both groups were trained with the alternative type of interval, and the tests were repeated. Group empty-first demonstrated a choose-long effect with both empty and filled intervals. Group filled-first demonstrated a weak (and nonsignificant) choose-short effect with filled intervals and a robust… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

2
4
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
2
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…also conducted psychophysical tests with different marker durations on empty-interval trials, and they did not find an increase in the percentage of long responding as marker duration d was increased. This finding replicated a result reported previously by Grant and Talarico (2004). Santi et al went on to test an attention-sharing explanation of the emptyfilled timing difference.…”
supporting
confidence: 88%
“…also conducted psychophysical tests with different marker durations on empty-interval trials, and they did not find an increase in the percentage of long responding as marker duration d was increased. This finding replicated a result reported previously by Grant and Talarico (2004). Santi et al went on to test an attention-sharing explanation of the emptyfilled timing difference.…”
supporting
confidence: 88%
“…This alternative account is also consistent with the results obtained in studies on the timing of empty intervals, that is, intervals signalled by brief start and stop markers (Grant, 2001;Grant & Talarico, 2004;Santi, Hornyak, & Miki, 2003;Santi, Ross, Coppa, & Coyle, 1999). In these studies, the subjects seem to add the retention interval to the sample stimulus, leading to a "long"-key bias.…”
supporting
confidence: 79%
“…In general, responses after unfilled intervals seemed better described by a "choose long" effect than by a "choose short" one. Other apparent differences in memory for filled and unfilled intervals in pigeons were obtained by Grant and Talarico (2004).…”
mentioning
confidence: 93%