Literature DB >> 11029025

Differential outcome effect in the horse.

Y Miyashita1, S Nakajima, H Imada.   

Abstract

Three horses were trained with a discrimination task in which the color (blue or yellow) of a center panel signaled the correct (left or right) response (lever press). Reinforcing outcomes for the two correct color-position combinations (blue-left and yellow-right) were varied across phases. Discrimination performance was better when the combinations were differentially reinforced by two types of food (chopped carrot pieces and a solid food pellet) than when the combinations were randomly reinforced by these outcomes or when there was a common reinforcer for each of the correct combinations. However, the discrimination performance established by the differential outcome procedure was still 80% to 90% correct, and an analysis of two-trial sequences revealed that the stimulus color of the preceding trial interfered with discrimination performance on a given trial. Our demonstration of the differential outcome effect in the horse and its further analysis might contribute to more efficient control of equine behavior in the laboratory as well as in horse sports.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11029025      PMCID: PMC1284794          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-245

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  13 in total

1.  Expectancies of reinforcer location and quality as cues for a conditional discrimination in pigeons.

Authors:  D A Williams; M M Butler; J B Overmier
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1990-01

2.  Two-choice conditional discrimination performance of pigeons as a function of reward expectancy, prechoice delay, and domesticity.

Authors:  D L Brodigan; G B Peterson
Journal:  Anim Learn Behav       Date:  1976-05

3.  Reward expectancy in primate prefrontal neurons.

Authors:  M Watanabe
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1996-08-15       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Sequential effects in pigeon delayed matching-to-sample performance.

Authors:  H L Roitblat; R A Scopatz
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1983-04

5.  Distribution of trials and intertrial retention in delayed matching to sample with pigeons.

Authors:  W A Roberts
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1980-07

6.  Local and global stereopsis in the horse.

Authors:  B Timney; K Keil
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Horses are sensitive to pictorial depth cues.

Authors:  B Timney; K Keil
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 1.490

8.  Visual acuity in the horse.

Authors:  B Timney; K Keil
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Generalization of a tactile stimulus in horses.

Authors:  D M Dougherty; P Lewis
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Stimulus generalization, discrimination learning, and peak shift in horses.

Authors:  D M Dougherty; P Lewis
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 2.468

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Conditional choice-unique outcomes establish expectancies that mediate choice behavior.

Authors:  J B Overmier; D Linwick
Journal:  Integr Physiol Behav Sci       Date:  2001 Jul-Sep

2.  On the effects of signaling reinforcer probability and magnitude in delayed matching to sample.

Authors:  Glenn S Brown; K Geoffrey White
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Behavioral and associative effects of differential outcomes in discrimination learning.

Authors:  Peter J Urcuioli
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  Remembering: the role of extraneous reinforcement.

Authors:  Glenn S Brown; K Geoffrey White
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.986

5.  A delay-specific differential outcomes effect in delayed matching to sample.

Authors:  K Geoffrey White; Rebecca J Sargisson
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.986

6.  Great tits who remember more accurately have difficulty forgetting, but variation is not driven by environmental harshness.

Authors:  Ethan Hermer; Ben Murphy; Alexis S Chaine; Julie Morand-Ferron
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.