A Classification and Analysis of Short-Term Retention Codes in Pigeons

Riley, Donald A.; Cook, Robert G.; Lamb, Marvin R.

doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60172-3

Cited by 61 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Real-time models assume that the cascade of stimulus elements diminishes over time, an assumption that real-time models share with older models that depict the temporal encoding of a stimulus as a decaying stimulus trace (Gormezano & Kehoe, 1981;Hull, 1943;Kehoe et al, 1987;Pavlov, 1927, p. 39;Sutton & Barto, 1981, 1990 or a short-term memory (Konorski & Lawicka, 1959;Riley, Cook, & Lamb, 1981;Roberts & Grant, 1976). For example, Buhusi and Schmajuk (1999) assume that the elements immediately following stimulus onset have a large magnitude but a short duration, whereas later elements are progressively smaller but have longer durations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal discrimination using different feature-target intervals in classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Kehoe

Boesenberg

2002

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a typical conditional discrimination, a target stimulus (X) is reinforced during one feature cue (A®X+), but not during another feature cue (B®X2). The present experiments used only a single "feature" cue (a 66-sec tone). On half of the trials, the target stimulus (a 400-msec light) was paired with the reinforcer when the feature-target interval was one duration (e.g., 5 sec). On the remaining trials, the interval was different (e.g., 45 sec), and the target stimulus was presented without the reinforcer. All the animals acquired this temporal discrimination, and subsequent testing with other feature-target intervals yielded generalization-like gradients. These results provide solid evidence that each portion of a feature cue is encoded in a distinctive fashion. Had temporal encoding not occurred, the feature cue would have been just as ambiguous a predictor of the reinforcer as was the target stimulus, and discrimination would not have been possible. The integration of real-time temporal encoding mechanisms into models of conditional discrimination is discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal discrimination using different feature-target intervals in classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Kehoe

Boesenberg

2002

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of researehers have aeknowledged that animals are capable of processing events either prospectively or retrospectively, depending on the demands of the task (Cohen, Galgan, & Fuerst, 1986;Grant & Speteh, 1991;Honig & Thompson, 1982;Riley, Cook, & Lamb, 1981;Urcuioli & Zentall, 1986). There are several ways in which flexible coding of temporal information could be shown.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Flexible coding of temporal information by pigeons: Event durations as remember and forget cues for temporal samples

Santi

Mielke

1991

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability of pigeons to use event durations as remember (R) and forget (F) eues for temporal samples was examined. Pigeons were required to indieate whether a houselight sample stimulus was short (2 sec) or long (6 sec) by pecking a red or a green eomparison stimulus. After training with a eonstant lO-sec delay interval, temporal eues (illumination ofthe center key) were presented 2 sec after the offset of the temporal samples. For one group, a short (2-see) temporal eue served as the Reue and a long (6-see) temporal eue served as the F eue. This was reversed for a second group of birds. During training, eomparison stimuli were always presented following the temporal Reue, but never following the temporal F eue. Tests for the effeetiveness of the temporal Rand F eues showed that F eues were equally effeetive in reducing matehing aeeuraey in both groups ofbirds. It was eoneluded that pigeons used the duration ofthe eue to determine whether or not to rehearse the memory code for the temporal sample, Pigeons' memory for event duration has typically been assessed by means of a delayed symbolic matching-tosample procedure. Pigeons have been trained to indicate whether a sample is short (2 sec) or long (8 sec) by pecking a red or green comparison stimulus for reinforcement. This research has demonstrated that when the retention interval between termination of the sample and the onset ofthe comparison stimuli is increased, a "choose short" response bias is evident (Kraemer, Mazmanian, & Roberts, 1985;Spetch, 1987;Spetch & Rusak, 1989; Spetch & Wilkie, 1982, 1983. That is, pigeons respond to the long sample duration after a long retention interval as if it had been the short duration. Wilkie (1982, 1983) proposed that the pigeons' subjective representation of the event duration in working memory becomes systematically shortened during the retention interval. As a result, after a long retention interval, the remembered duration of the long sample is more similar to the actual duration of the short sample, In opposition to this view, some have argued that temporal information is categorically coded along a nontemporal dimension (Kraemer et al., 1985;Parker & Glover, 1987). This could be a prospective categorical code (e.g., peck red or peck green), or a retrospective categorical code (e.g., short or long). Recently, there has been converging evidence that pigeons remember event durations in an analogical and retrospective fashion. Wilkie and Willson (1990) required pigeons to discriminate 2-, 8-, and 10-sec presentations of light. Choices of red, orange, and green keys were correct after 2, 8, and 10 sec, respectively. Differences in discriminability between the samples and comparison stimuli allowed Wilkie and Willson to exarnine the pattern of errors as task difficulty increased, and to draw inferences about the nature of coding. Errors were found to 00 more closely related to difficulty in discriminating sample stimuli than to difficulty in discriminating comparison stimuli. This was consistent with the code fo...

show abstract

“…Retrospective representation involves the retention in working memory of sample stimulus attributes, whereas the notion of prospective representation holds that the contents of working memory are response instructions about comparison stimuli. The basic distinction is whether working memory contains a representation of "what the animal has seen" or a representation of "what the animal anticipates responding to" (Honig & Riley, Cook, & Lamb, 1981;Roitblat, 1982;Stonebraker, 1981). In favor of the prospective position, the results of several studies have suggestedthat pigeons performing in delayed matching tasks actively anticipate response decisions (Honig & Dodd, 1983;Honig & Wasserman, 1981), trial outcomes (Edwards, Jagielo, Zentall, & Hogan, 1982;Honig, Mathe-son & Dodd, 1984;Peterson, 1984;, and the duration of memory intervals (Dodd & Honig, 1981;Wasserman, Grosch, & Nevin, 1982).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective representation: The effects of varied mapping of sample stimuli to comparison stimuli and differential trial outcomes on pigeons’ working memory

Santi

Roberts

1985

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Classification and Analysis of Short-Term Retention Codes in Pigeons

Cited by 61 publications

References 39 publications

Temporal discrimination using different feature-target intervals in classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Temporal discrimination using different feature-target intervals in classical conditioning of the rabbit’s nictitating membrane response

Flexible coding of temporal information by pigeons: Event durations as remember and forget cues for temporal samples

Prospective representation: The effects of varied mapping of sample stimuli to comparison stimuli and differential trial outcomes on pigeons’ working memory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About