Abstract
Impulsive behavior can be measured by performance on a successive delay-discounting task, in which a response to a stimulus provides a small reinforcer sooner (SS), but in the absence of a response, a larger reinforcer later (LL). Previous research suggests that the presence of a concurrent “distractor” stimulus, to which responding has no programed consequence, can result in increased LL reinforcers. In the present experiments, we used differences in the probability of reinforcement between SS and LL (rather than magnitude of reinforcement) and tested the hypothesis that the concurrent stimulus may become a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus. For the Red-Only group, a response to the SS stimulus resulted in a reinforcer with a low probability (SS), whereas the absence of a response resulted in a reinforcer with a high probability (LL). For the Red-Green group, (analogous to the more typical simultaneous choice between an SS and LL stimulus) the absence of a response to the SS stimulus replaced the SS stimulus with the LL stimulus and a response to the LL stimulus resulted in the reinforcer. Thus, for the Red-Green group, the concurrent stimulus should have been less effective because responding to the concurrent stimulus was not immediately followed by the reinforcer. In Experiment 1, the concurrent stimulus was a yellow key-light; in Experiment 2, it was a houselight. In both experiments, the concurrent stimulus was effective in increasing the number of LL reinforcers and the effect was larger for the Red-Only group than for the Red-Green group.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability statement
Copies of the data and all analyses can be obtained from the corresponding author.
References
Ainslie GW (1974) Impulse control in pigeons. J Exper Anal Behav 21:485–489. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1974.21-485
Beran MJ, Perdue BM, Rossettie MS, James BT, Whitham W, Walker B, Futch SE, Parrish AE (2016) Self-control assessments of Capuchin monkeys with the rotating tray task and the accumulation task. Behav Proc 129:68–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2016.06.007
Beran MJ, Evans TA (2012) Language-trained chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) delay gratification by choosing token exchange over immediate reward consumption. Am J Primatol 74(9):864–870
Bramlett J, Perdue B, Evans T, Beran M (2012) Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) let lesser rewards pass them by to get better rewards. Anim Cogn 15:963–969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0522-x
Dufour V, Wascher CAF, Braun A, Miller R, Bugnyar T (2012) Corvids can decide if a future exchange is worth waiting for. Biol Lett 8:201–204
Evans TA, Beran MJ (2007) Chimpanzees use self-distraction to cope with impulsivity. Biol Lett 3:599–602. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2007.0399
Fantino E, Squires N, Delbruck N, Peterson C (1972) Choice behavior and the accessibility of the reinforcer. J Exp Anal Behav 18:35–43
Green L, Myerson J (2004) A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psych Bul 130:769–792
Green L, Myerson J, Calvert AL (2010) Pigeons’ discounting of probabilistic and delayed reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav 94(2):113–123
Grosch A, Neuringer A (1981) Self-control in pigeons under the Michel paradigm. J Exp Anal Behav 35(1):2–21. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1981.35-3
Hearst E, Jenkins H (1974) Sign-tracking: the stimulus-reinforcer relation and directed action. Monograph of the Psychonomic Society, Austin
Kyonka EGE, Schutte NS (2018) Probability discounting and gambling: a meta-analysis. Addiction 113:2173–2181. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.14397
Lucon-Xiccato T, Gatto E, Bisazza A (2017) Fish perform like mammals and birds in inhibitory motor control tasks. Sci Rep 7(13144):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-13447-4
Mazur JE, Biondi DR (2009) Delay-amount tradeoffs in choices by pigeons and rats: hyperbolic versus exponential discounting. J Exp Anal Behav 91(2):197–211. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2009.91-197
Mischel W, Ebbesen EB, Zeiss AR (1972) Cognitive and attentional mechanisms in delay of gratification. J Pers Soc Pscyh 21(2):204–218
Mueller PM, Peng DN, Zentall TR (in press) What enables “distraction” to reduce delay discounting for pigeons (Columba livia). J Comp Psychol
Newquist MH, Dozier CL, Neidert PL (2012) A comparison of the effects of brief rules, a timer, and preferred toys on self-control. J App Behav Anal 45(3):497–509. https://doi.org/10.1091/jaba.2012.45-497
Osvath M, Osvath H (2008) Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) and orangutan (Pongo abelii) forethought: self-control and pre-experience in the face of future tool use. Anim Cog 11:661–674. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-008-0157-0
Rachlin H, Green L (1972) Commitment, choice and self-control. J Exp Anal Behav 17(1):15–22
Smethells JR, Reilly MP (2015) Intertrial interval duration and impulsive choice. J Exp Anal Behav 103(1):153–165. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.131
Todorov JC, Hanna ES, Bittencourt De Sá MC (1984) Frequency versus magnitude of reinforcement: new data with a different procedure. J Exp Anal Behav 41(2):157–167. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1984.41-157
Walker SF, Schnelle J, Hurwitz HMB (1970) Rates of concurrent responses and reinforcer duration. Psychon Sci 21:173–175
Zentall TR, Stagner JP (2011) Maladaptive choice behavior by pigeons: an animal analog ofgambling (sub-optimal human decision making behavior). Proc R Soc B 278:1203–1208
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Ethical approval
All animals were treated in accordance with the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at the University of Kentucky. The experimental procedures were according to Protocol # 2020-3675.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Mueller, P.M., Peng, D.N. & Zentall, T.R. “Distractor” effects in delay discounting of probability by pigeons. Anim Cogn 26, 1073–1081 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-023-01759-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-023-01759-0