Literature DB >> 30421124

To peck or not peck: Which do pigeons prefer?

Danielle M Andrews1, Thomas R Zentall2.   

Abstract

Animals are expected to minimize time and effort to reinforcement. Thus, not pecking should be preferred over pecking. However, even if time is held constant, pigeons often peck when it is allowed but not required (e.g., fixed time schedules), but with such schedules pecking may be adventitiously reinforced. In the present experiment, to better compare a schedule of reinforcement that requires pecking with one that requires the absence of pecking, we compared a modified fixed-interval (FI) schedule in which reinforcement follows the first peck after the interval has elapsed and a differential-reinforcement-of-other behavior (DRO) schedule, which requires pigeons to abstain from pecking for a similar interval. The delay to reinforcement was matched on a trial-by-trial basis by yoking the duration of the FI to match the DRO schedule that preceded it. Of 12 pigeons, six preferred the DRO schedule over the FI schedule and six did not show a schedule preference. Those that were indifferent between the schedules apparently had a stronger spatial preference than their schedule preference. Individual differences in the preference of the pigeons may have been related to their behavior during the DRO schedule.

Keywords:  Choice; Differential reinforcement of other behavior; Not pecking; Pecking; Pigeons

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30421124     DOI: 10.3758/s13420-018-0365-7

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


  17 in total

1.  "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

Review 2.  Specious reward: a behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control.

Authors:  G Ainslie
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1975-07       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  SECONDARY REINFORCEMENT AND RATE OF PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT.

Authors:  R J HERRNSTEIN
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1964-01       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Behavioral contrast.

Authors:  G S REYNOLDS
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1961-01       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Some effects of response-independent positive reinforcement on maintained operant behavior.

Authors:  R J HERRNSTEIN; W H MORSE
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1957-10

6.  Delayed reinforcement versus reinforcement after a fixed interval.

Authors:  A J Neuringer
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-05       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Choice and response contingencies.

Authors:  J Moore; E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1975-05       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Auto-maintenance in the pigeon: sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement.

Authors:  D R Williams; H Williams
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-07       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Required pecking and refraining from pecking alter judgments of time by pigeons.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Rebecca A Singer
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.986

10.  Impulsivity affects suboptimal gambling-like choice by pigeons.

Authors:  Jennifer R Laude; Joshua S Beckmann; Carter W Daniels; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.478

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.