No abstract

The authors explored whether pigeons can learn to discriminate simultaneously presented arrays of 16 identical (Same) visual items from arrays of 16 nonidentical (Different) visual items, when the correct choice was conditional on the presence of another cue: the color of the background. In one experiment, pigeons rapidly learned this task and, after training with arrays created from a 72-icon set, they exhibited nearly perfect transfer to novel testing arrays. In a second experiment, pigeons' accuracy to 24-, 20-, 12-, and 8-icon arrays during later testing remained as high as accuracy to training arrays; although accuracy declined with 4- and 2-icon arrays, it was still significantly above chance. In both experiments, pigeons' choice reaction time scores nicely complemented their choice accuracy scores. These results suggest that the conditional discrimination procedure is well suited to disclose same-different discrimination in pigeons and to elucidate the interaction between perception and abstraction in conceptual learning.

It is said that "absence makes the heart grow fonder." But, when and why does an absent event become salient to the heart or to the brain? An absent event may become salient when its nonoccurrence is surprising. Van Hamme and Wasserman (1994) found that a nonpresented but expected stimulus can actually change its associative status-and in the opposite direction from a presented stimulus. Associative models like that of Rescorla and Wagner (1972) focus only on presented cues; so, they cannot explain this result. However, absent cues can be permitted to change their value by assigning different learning parameters to present and absent cues. Van Hamme and Wasserman revised the RescorlaWagner model so that the α parameter is positive for present cues, but negative for absent cues; now, changes in the associative strength of absent cues move in the opposite direction as presented ones. This revised Rescorla-Wagner model can thus explain such otherwise vexing empirical findings as backward blocking, recovery from overshadowing, and backward conditioned inhibition. Moreover, the revised model predicts new effects. For example, explicit information about the absence of nonpresented cues should increase their salience (that is, their negative α value should be larger), leading to stronger associative changes than when no explicit mention is made of cue absence. Support for this prediction is detailed in a new causal judgment experiment in which participants rated the effectiveness of different foods' triggering a patient's allergic reaction. Overall, these and other findings encourage us to view human causal learning from an associative perspective.

No abstract

Most theories and experimental investigations of discrimination learning and categorization, in both humans and animals, hypothesize that attention must be allocated to the relevant attributes of the training stimuli for learning to occur. Attention has conventionally been inferred after learning has transpired rather than examined while learning is transpiring. We presented pigeons with a visual categorization task in which we monitored their choice accuracy through their responses to different report buttons; critically, we tracked the location of the pigeons' pecks to both the relevant and irrelevant attributes of the training stimuli using touchscreen technology, in order to find out where the birds may have been attending during the course of categorization learning. Pigeons readily mastered the categorization task; most importantly, as training progressed, they increasingly concentrated their pecks on the relevant features of the category exemplars, suggesting that the birds were tracking the relevant information to solve the task. When either new irrelevant features were introduced (Experiment 1) or when new relevant features were introduced and later the discriminative value of these new relevant features was reversed (Experiment 2), pigeons' choice accuracy and peck tracking were strongly affected. These results help elucidate the dynamics and interplay of attention and learning; they also suggest that peck tracking can be a suitable measure of the allocation of attention in pigeons, much as eyetracking is deemed to be a suitable measure of attention in humans.