Literature DB >> 22367755

Do pigeons prefer information in the absence of differential reinforcement?

Thomas R Zentall1, Jessica P Stagner.   

Abstract

Prior research has indicated that pigeons do not prefer an alternative that provides a sample (for matching to sample) over an alternative that does not provide a sample (i.e., there is no indication of which comparison stimulus is correct). However, Zentall and Stagner (Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes 36:506-509, 2010) showed that when delay of reinforcement was controlled, pigeons had a strong preference for matching over pseudomatching (i.e., there was a sample, but it did not indicate which comparison stimulus was correct). Experiment 1 of the present study replicated and extended the results of the Zentall and Stagner (Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes 36:506-509, 2010) study by including an identity relation between the sample and one of the comparison stimuli in both the matching and pseudomatching tasks. In Experiment 2, in which we asked whether the pigeons would still prefer matching if we equated the two tasks for probability of reinforcement, we found no systematic preference for matching over pseudomatching. Thus, it appears that in the absence of differential reinforcement, the information provided by a sample that signals which of the two comparison stimuli is correct is insufficient to produce a preference for that alternative.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22367755      PMCID: PMC3508152          DOI: 10.3758/s13420-012-0067-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Learn Behav        ISSN: 1543-4494            Impact factor:   1.986


  15 in total

1.  The acquisition of observing responses in the absence of differential external reinforcement.

Authors:  W F PROKASY
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1956-04

2.  Uncertainty and conflict: a point of contact between information-theory and behavior-theory concepts.

Authors:  D E BERLYNE
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1957-11       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  The role of observing responses in discrimination learning.

Authors:  L B WYCKOFF
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1952-11       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Suboptimal choice behavior by pigeons.

Authors:  Jessica P Stagner; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-06

Review 5.  Conditioned reinforcement and response strength.

Authors:  Timothy A Shahan
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  A test of the negative discriminative stimulus as a reinforcer of observing.

Authors:  J A Dinsmoor; M P Browne; C E Lawrence
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-07       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Choice and rate of reinforcement.

Authors:  E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-09       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Do pigeons (Columba livia) study for a test?

Authors:  William A Roberts; Miranda C Feeney; Neil McMillan; Krista MacPherson; Evanya Musolino; Mark Petter
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2009-04

9.  Revisiting the role of bad news in maintaining human observing behavior.

Authors:  Edmund Fantino; Alan Silberberg
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Temporal maps and informativeness in associative learning.

Authors:  Peter D Balsam; C Randy Gallistel
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2009-01-10       Impact factor: 13.837

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Understanding active sampling strategies: Empirical approaches and implications for attention and decision research.

Authors:  Jacqueline Gottlieb
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 4.027

2.  Computational mechanisms of curiosity and goal-directed exploration.

Authors:  Philipp Schwartenbeck; Johannes Passecker; Tobias U Hauser; Thomas Hb FitzGerald; Martin Kronbichler; Karl J Friston
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-05-10       Impact factor: 8.140

3.  Why don't guiding cues always guide in behavior chains?

Authors:  Alliston K Reid; Hannah F Rapport; Thien-An Le
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  Intrinsically motivated oculomotor exploration guided by uncertainty reduction and conditioned reinforcement in non-human primates.

Authors:  Nabil Daddaoua; Manuel Lopes; Jacqueline Gottlieb
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-02-03       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.