EFFECTS OF FIXED‐RATIO SAMPLE AND CHOICE RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS UPON ODDITY MATCHING<sup>1</sup>

Lydersen, Tore; Perkins, David; Chairez, Herman

doi:10.1901/jeab.1977.27-97

Cited by 16 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The finding that larger comparison response requirements adversely affect matching accuracy is consistent with results recently reported by Lydersen et al (1977). These investigators found that accuracy of choosing the odd (rather than the matching) comparison was adversely affected by increasing response requirements.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…While the results of Lydersen et al (1977) are easily amenable to a memory interpretation-larger ratios in their procedure may have simply increased the effective delay or "retention" interval-this is not the case with the present results. If the bird remembers the sample well enough to choose accurately when the comparison ratio is small, why cannot this information be recalled when larger comparison ratios are scheduled, when the only difference between the two schedules is the fact that additional pecks after the choice is madeare required?…”

Section: Methodscontrasting

confidence: 66%

“…As far as is known, the effect of different schedules of comparison stimuli termination on matching accuracy has not been systematically studied [although there has been one recent study of the effects of comparison schedules on choosing the odd stimulus by Lydersen, Perkins, and Chairez (1977)]. In all studies, only a single response to the comparison stimuli has been required.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The effect of sample and comparison ratio schedules on delayed matching to sample in the pigeon

Wilkie

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Experiment 1, three food-deprived pigeons received trials that began with red or green illumination of the center pecking key. Two or four pecks on this sample key turned it off and initiated a 0-to 10-sec delay. Following the delay, the two outer comparison keys were illuminated, one with red and one with green light. In one condition, a single peck on either of these keys turned the other key off and produced either grain reinforcement (if the comparison that was pecked matched the preceding sample) or the intertrial interval (if it did not match). In other conditions, 3 or 15 additional pecks were required to produce reinforcement or the intertrial interval. The frequency of pecking the matching comparison stimulus (matching accuracy] decreased as the delay increased, increased as the sample ratio was increased, and decreased as the comparison ratio was increased. The results of Experiment 2 suggested that higher comparison ratios adversely affect matching accuracy primarily by delaying reinforcement for choosing the correct comparison. The results of Experiment 3, in which delay of reinforcement for choosing the matching comparison was manipulated, confirmed that delayed reinforcement decreases matching accuracy.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Methodscontrasting

confidence: 66%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of sample and comparison ratio schedules on delayed matching to sample in the pigeon

Wilkie

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These different !TIs and ratios were employed to facilitate learning of the baseline task by the nonhuman subjects. Previous reports showed that long !TIs and large ratio requirements to, or long durations of, instructional discriminative stimuli facilitate animal learning (e.g., Holt & Shafer, 1973;Lydersen, Perkins, & Chairez, 1977;Nelson & Wasserman, 1978;Thomas, 1979;Williams, 1971). Once the task was learned, the same values were kept in the test series so as not to unnecessarily confuse the subjects.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perception of the Ponzo illusion by rhesus monkeys, chimpanzees, and humans: Similarity and difference in the three primate species

Fujita

1997

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Experiment 1, 3 rhesus monkeys and 1 chimpanzee were tested for their susceptibility to the Ponzo illusion. The subjects were first trained to report the length of the target bar presented at the center of the computer display by touching either of the two choice locations designated as "long"or "short." When inverted-V context lines were superimposed on the target bar, the subjects tended to report "long" more often as the apex of these upward-converging lines approached the target bar. The perception of the Ponzo illusion was thus demonstrated. In Experiment 2, the same 3 rhesus monkeys and 2 new chimpanzees were tested using two types of context lines that provided different strengths of linear perspective. The subjects showed a bias similar to that found in Experiment 1,but there was no difference in the magnitude of the bias between the two types of context in either species. This failed to support the classic account for the Ponzo illusion, the perspective theory, raised by Gregory (1963). In Experiment 3, the magnitude of the illusion was compared between the inverted-V context and the context consisting of short vertical lines having the same gap as the former in the same 3 rhesus monkeys and 2 of the chimpanzees from the preceding experiments. While the chimpanzees showed the illusion for both types of stimuli, the monkeys showed no illusion for the latter. In Experiment 4, 6 humans were tested in a comparable procedure. As in the nonhuman primates, the illusion was unaffected by the strength of linear perspective. On the other hand, the humans showed considerably larger illusion for the context consisting of vertical lines than for contexts consisting of converging lines. Thus, there was a great species difference in the effect of the gap itself on the magnitude of the Ponzo illusion. Similarity found at first turned out to be no more than superficial. Possible sources of this species difference are discussed.Nonhuman primates are commonly used as a model in the study of human information processing, especially in neuroscience. The rationale of this lies in that they are the species closest to humans and at the least their fundamental perceptual processes ought to be similar to those of humans.Actually, for example, perception of some natural and geometric patterns has been shown to be similar not only among primates but also among species from different taxa

show abstract

“…Using fixed-ratio schedules, Sacks, Kamil, and Mack (1972) and Lydersen, Perkins, and Chairez (1977) have shown that, when more than one response to the sample is required to produce the comparison stimuli, the accuracy of matching and oddity performance increases. The greater the number of required observing responses on the center key, the higher the accuracy.…”

Section: Effects Of Intermittent Schedulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complex Learning and Information Processing by Pigeons: A Critical Analysis

Carter

Werner

1978

J Exper Analysis Behavior

343

241

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three models of conditional discrimination learning by pigeons are described: stimulus configuration learning, the multiple-rule model, and concept learning. A review of the literature reveals that true concept learning is not characteristic of the behavior of pigeons in matching-to-sample, oddity-from-sample, or symbolic matching studies. Instead, pigeons learn a set of sample-specific SD rules. Transfer of the discrimination to novel stimuli, at least along the hue dimension, is predicted by a "coding hypothesis", which holds that pigeons make a unique, but usually unobserved response, R,, to each sample, and that the comparison stimulus chosen depends on which R1 was emitted in the presence of the sample. Convincing evidence is found that pigeons do code sample hues, but there is little evidence that allows one to infer that the "coding event" must have behavioral properties. Parameters of the conditional discrimination paradigm are identified, and it is shown that by appropriate parametric manipulation, a variety of analogous tasks may be generated for both human and animal subjects. The tasks make possible the comparative study of complex learning, attention, memory, and information processing, with the added advantage that behavior processes may be compared systematically across tasks.

show abstract

EFFECTS OF FIXED‐RATIO SAMPLE AND CHOICE RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS UPON ODDITY MATCHING¹

Cited by 16 publications

References 11 publications

The effect of sample and comparison ratio schedules on delayed matching to sample in the pigeon

The effect of sample and comparison ratio schedules on delayed matching to sample in the pigeon

Perception of the Ponzo illusion by rhesus monkeys, chimpanzees, and humans: Similarity and difference in the three primate species

Complex Learning and Information Processing by Pigeons: A Critical Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

EFFECTS OF FIXED‐RATIO SAMPLE AND CHOICE RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS UPON ODDITY MATCHING1

Cited by 16 publications

References 11 publications

The effect of sample and comparison ratio schedules on delayed matching to sample in the pigeon

The effect of sample and comparison ratio schedules on delayed matching to sample in the pigeon

Perception of the Ponzo illusion by rhesus monkeys, chimpanzees, and humans: Similarity and difference in the three primate species

Complex Learning and Information Processing by Pigeons: A Critical Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

EFFECTS OF FIXED‐RATIO SAMPLE AND CHOICE RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS UPON ODDITY MATCHING¹