Literature DB >> 18325692

Matching-to-sample by pigeons: the dissociation of comparison choice frequency from the probability of reinforcement.

Thomas R Zentall1, Rebecca A Singer, Holly C Miller.   

Abstract

It has been proposed that comparison choice in matching-to-sample should depend on two factors, the relative probability of reinforcement associated with each of the comparison stimuli and the conditional probability of each comparison stimulus being correct given presentation of one of the samples. DiGian and Zentall [DiGian, K.A., Zentall, T.R., 2007. Matching-to-sample in pigeons: in the absence of sample memory, sample frequency is a better predictor of comparison choice than the probability of reinforcement for comparison choice. Learn Behav. 35, 242-261] have shown that sample frequency together with the probability of choosing each of the comparison stimuli in training can influence comparison choice when delays are introduced, when the number of reinforcements associated with each of the comparison stimuli is equated. Furthermore, Zentall and Clement [Zentall, T.R., Clement, T.S., 2002. Memory mechanisms in pigeons: Evidence of base-rate neglect. J. Exp. Psych.: Anim. Behav. Proc. 28, 111-115] have found that sample frequency can affect comparison choice when delays are introduced independently of the number of choices of each of the comparison stimuli in training and the number of reinforcements associated with each of the comparison stimuli is equated. In the present experiment we found that the probability of choosing each of the comparison stimuli in training can affect comparison choice when delays are introduced, independently of sample frequency and when the number of reinforcements associated with each of the comparison stimuli is equated. Together, these experiments suggest that when the sample is not available, there is a partial dissociation between comparison choice and the probability of reinforcement associated with each of the comparison stimuli.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18325692      PMCID: PMC2430415          DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2008.01.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Processes        ISSN: 0376-6357            Impact factor:   1.777


  9 in total

1.  Psychophysics of remembering.

Authors:  K G White; J T Wixted
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Memory mechanisms in pigeons: evidence of base-rate neglect.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Tricia S Clement
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2002-01

3.  Are theories of learning necessary?

Authors:  B F SKINNER
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1950-07       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  The relation between the generalized matching law and signal-detection theory.

Authors:  M C Davison; R D Tustin
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Choice As A Function Of Reinforcement Ratios In Delayed Matching-to-sample.

Authors:  J Hartl; E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Stimulus Presentation Ratios And The Outcomes For Correct Responses In Signal-detection Procedures.

Authors:  V Johnstone; B Alsop
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Matching-to-sample in pigeons: in the absence of sample memory, sample frequency is a better predictor of comparison choice than the probability of reinforcement for comparison choice.

Authors:  Kelly A DiGan; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 1.986

8.  Learning to commit or avoid the base-rate error.

Authors:  A S Goodie; E Fantino
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1996-03-21       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  Independence of sensitivity to relative reinforcement rate and discriminability in signal detection.

Authors:  D McCarthy; M Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1980-11       Impact factor: 2.468

  9 in total
  2 in total

1.  The Monty Hall dilemma with pigeons: No, you choose for me.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Jacob P Case; Tiffany L Collins
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.986

Review 2.  Revisited: Pigeons Have Much Cognitive Behavior in Common With Humans.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-01-21
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.