Same-different discriminations in the pigeon

Pisacreta, Richard; Witt, Kevin

doi:10.3758/bf03329995

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results, as well as those reported in related studies (e.g., Fujita, 1983;Malott & Malott, 1970;Pisacreta et al, 1984;Pisacreta & Witt, 1983;Zentall & Hogan, 1978), suggest that, under some modified matching conditions, pigeons can indeed learn the concept of samedifferent. Furthermore, the birds in the present study had to satisfy each of Prernack's other criticisms in order to perform as well as they did.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Many reports have suggestedthat traininganimalswith a large numberof stimuli facilitates matchingtransfer (e.g., Holmes, 1979;Levine & Harlow, 1959;Lombardi et aI., 1984;Pisacreta & Witt. 1983;Urcuioli & Nevin, 1975).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The birds matched efficiently (i.e., produced a match with the fewest keypecks possible) during 20%-80% of the session trials across phases. In a follow-up study, Pisacreta and Witt (1983) also employed four matching keys and one odd key at trial onset; in this study, however, pecks to the matching keys had no consequence. The birds had to peck the nonmatching key in order to produce a reinforcer.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Transfer of oddity learning in the pigeon

Pisacreta

Lefave

Lesneski

et al. 1985

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two pigeons were trained on a six-key modified oddity-from-sample procedure. The stimuli were color pictures of birds, butterflies, and human faces. Initially, the third peck on the sample key (which presented one of three different bird pictures) lit only one comparison key. Every three additional pecks on the sample illuminated another comparison key. Fifteen sample pecks produced the maximum of five comparison stimuli. A peck on the comparison key that presented the nonmatching bird picture produced grain. Pecks on matching keys turned off all the comparison keys and repeated the trial. The birds learned to peck each sample until the nonmatching comparison stimulus was produced, and then to peck that key. After acquisition (70%-90% accuracy), the three bird stimuli were replaced by a new set of three bird pictures. Subsequent phases provided new sets of bird, butterfly, and human face stimuli. Both birds showed transfer of oddity learning to the novel samples. The data suggest that the birds may have been engaging in conceptualtype oddity learning, rather than learning discrete five-key discriminations or a series of two component chains.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transfer of oddity learning in the pigeon

Pisacreta

Lefave

Lesneski

et al. 1985

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is not surprising; several papers have suggested that transfer can be facilitated by initially training subjects with a large number of stimuli (e.g. Holmes, 1979;Honig, 1965;Levine & Harlow, 1959;Malott & Malott, 1970;Mishkin & Delacour, 1975;Pisacreta & Witt, 1983;Urcuioli & Nevin, 1975), or by increasing the number of incorrect comparison stimuli (e.g., Nissen & McCulloch, 1937;Pastore, 1954;Zentall et al, 1980). For example, Zentall et al (1980) reported 65 to 80% matching accuracies with three response keys, and 85 to 95% accuracy levels when five keys were employed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transfer of Matching‐to‐figure Samples in the Pigeon

Pisacreta

Redwood

Witt

1984

J Exper Analysis Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three pigeons were trained on a modified six-key matching-to-sample procedure. The third peck on the figure-sample key (which presented a bird, hand, face, beetle, rabbit, fish, flower, or red hue, as the sample) lighted only one comparison key. Every three additional pecks on the sample lighted another comparison key, up to a maximum of five keys. Pecks on keys of matching figures produced grain. Pecks on nonmatching keys (mismatches) turned off all lights on the comparison keys and repeated the trial. Three figures were used during acquisition. The birds learned to peck each sample until the matching comparison stimulus appeared on one of three comparison stimulus keys, and then to peck that key. Later, five novel stimuli, employed as both sample and comparison stimuli, and two additional matching keys were added. Each bird showed matching transfer to the novel samples. The data suggest that the birds may have learned the concept of figure matching rather than a series of two-component chains or discrete five-key discriminations.

show abstract

Species-Specific Differences in Learning

Poli

1988

Intelligence and Evolutionary Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Same-different discriminations in the pigeon

Cited by 11 publications

References 17 publications

Transfer of oddity learning in the pigeon

Transfer of oddity learning in the pigeon

Transfer of Matching‐to‐figure Samples in the Pigeon

Species-Specific Differences in Learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About