Literature DB >> 19230517

Extensive training is insufficient to produce the work-ethic effect in pigeons.

Marco Vasconcelos1, Peter J Urcuioli.   

Abstract

Zentall and Singer (2007a) hypothesized that our failure to replicate the work-ethic effect in pigeons (Vasconcelos, Urcuioli, & Lionello-DeNolf, 2007) was due to insufficient overtraining following acquisition of the high- and low-effort discriminations. We tested this hypothesis using the original work-ethic procedure (Experiment 1) and one similar to that used with starlings (Experiment 2) by providing at least 60 overtraining sessions. Despite this extensive overtraining, neither experiment revealed a significant preference for stimuli obtained after high effort. Together with other findings, these data support our contention that pigeons do not reliably show a work-ethic effect.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19230517      PMCID: PMC2614815          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2009.91-143

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


  13 in total

1.  To walk or to fly? How birds choose among foraging modes.

Authors:  L M Bautista; J Tinbergen; A Kacelnik
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2001-01-30       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  "Work ethic" in pigeons: reward value is directly related to the effort or time required to obtain the reward.

Authors:  T S Clement; J R Feltus; D H Kaiser; T R Zentall
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-03

3.  Time-out from positive reinforcement.

Authors:  N H AZRIN
Journal:  Science       Date:  1961-02-10       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Discriminative stimuli that follow a delay have added value for pigeons.

Authors:  Kelly A DiGian; Andrea M Friedrich; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-10

5.  Pigeons shift their preference toward locations of food that take more effort to obtain.

Authors:  Andrea M Friedrich; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2004-11-30       Impact factor: 1.777

6.  Discriminative stimuli that follow the absence of reinforcement are preferred by pigeons over those that follow reinforcement.

Authors:  Andrea M Friedrich; Tricia S Clement; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.986

7.  Within-trial contrast: when is a failure to replicate not a type I error?

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Rebecca A Singer
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Failure to replicate the 'work ethic" effect in pigeons.

Authors:  Marco Vasconcelos; Peter J Urcuioli; Karen M Lionello-DeNolf
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Within-trial contrast: when you see it and when you don't.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.986

10.  Within-trial contrast: pigeons prefer conditioned reinforcers that follow a relatively more rather than a less aversive event.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Rebecca A Singer
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 2.468

View more
  3 in total

1.  Understanding preference shifts: a review and alternate explanation of within-trial contrast and state-dependent valuation.

Authors:  James N Meindl
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  2012

2.  Within-trial contrast: The effect of probability of reinforcement in training.

Authors:  Cassandra D Gipson; Holly C Miller; Jérôme J D Alessandri; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 1.777

3.  Capuchin monkeys do not show human-like pricing effects.

Authors:  Rhia Catapano; Nicholas Buttrick; Jane Widness; Robin Goldstein; Laurie R Santos
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-12-02
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.