Literature DB >> 22696201

Midsession reversal learning: why do pigeons anticipate and perseverate?

Jessica P Stagner1, Daniel M Michler, Rebecca M Rayburn-Reeves, Jennifer R Laude, Thomas R Zentall.   

Abstract

Past research has shown that when given a simultaneous visual-discrimination midsession reversal task, pigeons typically anticipate the reversal well before it occurs and perseverate after it occurs. It appears that they use the estimation of time (or trial number) into the session, rather than (or in addition to) the more reliable cue, the outcome from the previous trial (i.e., a win-stay/lose-shift response rule), to determine which stimulus they should choose. In the present research, we investigated several variables that we thought might encourage pigeons to use a more efficient response strategy. In Experiment 1, we used a treadle-stepping response, rather than key pecking, to test the hypothesis that reflexive key pecking may have biased pigeons to estimate the time (or trial number) into the session at which the reversal would occur. In Experiment 2, we attempted to make the point of reversal in the session more salient by inserting irrelevant trials with stimuli different from the original discriminative stimuli, and for a separate group, we added a 5-s time-out penalty following incorrect choices. The use of a treadle-stepping response did not improve reversal performance, and although we found some improvement in reversal performance when the reversal was signaled and when errors resulted in a time-out, we found little evidence for performance that approached the win-stay/lose-shift accuracy shown by rats.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 22696201      PMCID: PMC3524370          DOI: 10.3758/s13420-012-0077-3

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


  8 in total

Review 1.  THE COMPARATIVE PSYCHOLOGY OF LEARNING.

Authors:  J M WARREN
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  1965       Impact factor: 24.137

2.  PHYLETIC DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING.

Authors:  M E BITTERMAN
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  1965-06

3.  Temporal control of internal states in pigeons.

Authors:  Robert G Cook; Hara A Rosen
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-12

4.  Post-choice information processing by pigeons.

Authors:  Tracy I Martin; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2005-03-03       Impact factor: 3.084

5.  The maintenance of key pecking by stimulus-contingent and response-independent food presentation.

Authors:  E Gamzu; B Schwartz
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-01       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Simultaneous discrimination reversal learning in pigeons and humans: anticipatory and perseverative errors.

Authors:  Rebecca M Rayburn-Reeves; Mikaël Molet; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.986

7.  Reversal learning in rats (Rattus norvegicus) and pigeons (Columba livia): qualitative differences in behavioral flexibility.

Authors:  Rebecca M Rayburn-Reeves; Jessica P Stagner; Chelsea R Kirk; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2012-03-19       Impact factor: 2.231

8.  Auto-shaping of the pigeon's key-peck.

Authors:  P L Brown; H M Jenkins
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1968-01       Impact factor: 2.468

  8 in total
  7 in total

1.  Midsession shifts in reward probability and the control of behavioral variability.

Authors:  W David Stahlman; Kenneth J Leising
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 1.986

2.  Rats' midsession reversal performance: the nature of the response.

Authors:  Aaron P Smith; Kristina F Pattison; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.986

3.  Everywhere and everything: The power and ubiquity of time.

Authors:  Andrew T Marshall; Kimberly Kirkpatrick
Journal:  Int J Comp Psychol       Date:  2015

4.  Midsession reversals with pigeons: visual versus spatial discriminations and the intertrial interval.

Authors:  Jennifer R Laude; Jessica P Stagner; Rebecca Rayburn-Reeves; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.986

5.  Basic reversal-learning capacity in flies suggests rudiments of complex cognition.

Authors:  Brad R Foley; Paul Marjoram; Sergey V Nuzhdin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Variability in competitive decision-making speed and quality against exploiting and exploitative opponents.

Authors:  Benjamin James Dyson
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Kea (Nestor notabilis) show flexibility and individuality in within-session reversal learning tasks.

Authors:  Monika Laschober; Roger Mundry; Ludwig Huber; Raoul Schwing
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 3.084

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.