EFFECTS OF MONOCHROMATIC REARING ON SPECTRAL DISCRIMINATION LEARNING AND THE PEAK SHIFT IN CHICKS¹

Abstract

Chicks were hatched and raised in white or monochromatic sodium (589 nm) light. They were trained on a 590 (+) vs. 580 (-) nm successive discrimination. The combined results of two experiments indicated that rearing illumination did not affect discrimination acquisition. All subjects given generalization tests after discrimination training exhibited peak shifts that were equivalent for the two rearing conditions. The peak shifts exhibited by the monochromatically reared subjects represent maximum responding to stimuli they had not previously seen. This result further confirms the notion that behavioral control by the spectral dimension in birds is organized independently of differential early experience on that dimension.

EVIDENCE FOR THE INNATE BASIS OF THE HUE DIMENSION IN THE DUCKLING1

“…The present results confirm and extend the unidirectional peak-shifts in chicks described by Rudolph and Honig (1972). In the present experiment, peak-shifts were observed in ducklings both above and below Sduring generalization tests in which the wavelength of test stimuli ranged between 490 and 650 nm (cf.…”

“…The peaks of the groups trained not to respond to 610 nanometers were located at 580 nanometers. These results (in agreement with earlier data of Rudolph and Honig, 1972) suggest that ducklings have an innate basis for ordering stimuli of different wavelengths along the hue dimension.…”

“…Those techniques that have been developed (e.g., Schneider, 1972;Shepard, 1965) stimuli from the same continuum, the peak of a generalization gradient does not occur at S+ (the stimulus correlated with reinforcement), but is instead displaced in a direction remote from the physical value of S-(the stimulus correlated with extinction). Rudolph and Honig (1972) reared chicks in monochromatic sodium light (590 nm). During the third and fourth weeks after hatching, these subjects were trained to discriminate 590 (S+) from 580 (S-) by a successive discrimination paradigm.…”

COMBINED‐STIMULUS CONTROL AS A FUNCTION OF THE RESPONSE RATE CONTROLLED BY THE ABSENCE OF THE SINGLE STIMULI1

“…Peak shift represents another phenomenon in which different results have been accompanied by different relative response rates during training stimuli. In peak shift, points on the generalization gradient removed from one training stimulus in a direction away from the other training stimulus control either higher (e.g., Hanson, 1959;Pierrel and Sherman, 1960;Rudolph and Honig, 1972;Terrace, 1968;Yarczower, Gollub, and Dickson, 1968) or lower (Guttman, 1965;Hendry, Switalski, and Yarczower, 1969) response rates than either of the training stimuli. While numerous experiments and discussions have focused upon the necessary and sufficient conditions for the occurrence of higher response rates during shifted stimuli (Bloomfield, 1969;Friedman and Guttman, 1965;Kalish, 1969;Terrace, 1966;1968;Yarczower, et al, 1968), the conditions responsible for higher versus lower response rates have received little attention.…”

Operant generalization of auditory tempo in quail neonates

“…Even in adults, that story appears to be a complicated one. In juveniles, differential (differently consequated) exposure to a stimulus dimension has appeared essential for peaked results in some cases (e.g., Kerr, Ostapoff, & Rubel, 1979; Peterson, 1962; Rubel & Rosenthal, 1975) but not in others (e.g., Ganz & Riesen, 1962; Malott, 1968; Mountjoy & Malott, 1968; Rudolph & Honig, 1972; Rudolph, Honig, & Gerry, 1969). …”