Abstract
Four mentally retarded human subjects performed delayed identity matching-to-sample tasks under conditions of outcome-specific and nonspecific reinforcement contingencies. With outcome-specific contingencies, experimentally defined correct selections of different discriminative stimuli were perfectly correlated with one of two different consequences (e.g., different foods); with nonspecific contingencies, correct selections were equally likely to be followed by either consequence. Previous studies with pigeons have shown consistently higher accuracy on delayed-matching tasks with outcome-specific contingencies. Results of this study failed to replicate that finding. For three subjects, accuracy scores were similar in specific and nonspecific conditions at fixed delays ranging from 0 s to 5 s. For the other subject, delay duration varied within each session, and accuracy scores improved across sessions regardless of outcome condition.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
BRODIGAN, D. A., & PETERSON, G. B. (1976). Two-choice conditional discrimination performance of pigeons as function of reward expectancy, prechoice delay, and domesticity. Animal Learning and Behavior, 4, 121–124.
BUSKIST, W. R., MORGAN, D., & BARRY, A. (1983). Interspecies generality and human behavior: An addendum to Baron and Perone. The Behavior Analyst, 6, 107–108.
BUTTERFIELD, E. C., WAMBOLD, C., & BELMONT, J. M. (1973). On the theory and practice of improving short-term memory. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 11, 654–669.
CARTER, D. E., & WERNER, T. J. (1978). Complex learning and information processing by pigeons: A critical analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 565–601.
COHEN, L. R., BRADY, J., & LOWRY, M. (1981). The role of differential responding in matching-to-sample and delayed matching performance. In M. L. Commons & J. A. Nevins (Eds.), Quantitative analysis of behavior, Vol. 1, Discriminative properties of reinforcement schedules (pp. 345–364). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
CONSTANTINE, B., & SIDMAN, M. (1975). The role of naming in delayed matching to sample. American Journal of Mental Deficiency 79, 680–689.
CUMMING, W. W., & BERRYMAN, R. (1961). Some data on matching behavior in the pigeon. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 281–284.
D’AMATO, M. R., SALMON, D. P., LOUKAS, E., & TOMIE, A. (1986). Processing of identity and conditional relation in monkeys (Cebus apella) and pigeons (Columba livia). Animal Learning and Behavior, 14, 365–373.
DELONG, R. E., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (1981). Effects of differential reinforcement expectancies on successive matching-to-sample performance in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 7, 394–412.
DUBE, W. V., & MCILVANE, W. J. (1989). Adapting a microcomputer for behavioral evaluation of mentally retarded individuals. In J. A. Mulick & R. F. Antonak (Eds.), Transitions in mental retardation, Vol. 4 (pp. 104–127). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
DUBE, W. V., MCILVANE, W. J., MACKAY, H. A., & STODDARD, L. T. (1987). Stimulus class membership established via stimulus-reinforcer relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 47, 159–175.
DUBE, W. V., MCILVANE, W. J., MAGUIRE, R. W., MACKAY, H. A., & STODDARD, L. T (1989). Stimulus class formation and stimulus-reinforcer relations. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 65–76.
EDWARDS, C. A., JAGIELO, J. A., ZENTALL, T. R., & HOGAN, D. E. (1982). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness in matching to sample by pigeons: Mediation by reinforcer-specific expectancies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 8, 244–259.
ETZEL, B. C. (1987). Pigeons and children: What are the differences? The Psychological Record, 37, 17–27.
FARTHING, G. W., & OPUDA, M. J. (1974). Transfer of matching-to-sample in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 199–213.
FEDORCHAK, P. M., & BOLLES, R. C. (1986). Differential outcome effect using a biologically neutral outcome difference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 12, 125–130.
GLIDDEN, L. M. (1979). Training of learning and memory of retarded persons: Strategies, techniques, and teaching tools. In N. R. Ellis (Ed.), Handbook of mental deficiency psychological theory and research (pp. 619–657). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
HONIG, W. K., MATHESON, W. R., & DODD, P. W. D. (1984). Outcome expectancies as mediators for discriminative responding. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 38, 196–217.
JENKINS, H. M., & MOORE, B. R. (1973). The form of the auto-shaped response with food or water reinforcers. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 20, 163–181.
LITT, M. D., & SCHREIBMAN, L. (1981). Stimulus-specific reinforcement in the acquisition of receptive labels by autistic children. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1, 171–186.
LOWENKRON, B. (1984). Coding responses and the generalization of matching to sample in children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 42, 1–18.
LOWENKRON, B. (1988). Generalization of delayed identity matching in retarded children. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50, 163–172.
PETERSON, G. B. (1984). How expectancies guide behavior. In H. L. Roitblat, T. G. Bever, & H. S. Terrace (Eds.), Animal cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
PETERSON, G. B., & TRAPOLD, M. A. (1980). Effects of altering outcome expectancies on pigeons’ delayed conditional discrimination performance. Learning and Motivation, 11, 267–288.
PETERSON, G. B., WHEELER, R. L., & ARMSTRONG, G. D. (1978). Expectancies as mediators in the differential-reward conditional discrimination performance of pigeons. Animal Learning and Behavior, 6, 279–285.
PETERSON, G. B., WHEELER, R. L., & TRAPOLD, M. A. (1980). Enhancement of pigeons’ conditional discrimination performance by expectancies of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. Animal Learning and Behavior, 8, 22–30.
ROSENBERGER, P. B., STODDARD, L. T., & SIDMAN, M. (1972). Sample matching techniques in the study of children’s language. In R. L. Schiefelbusch (Ed.), Language of the mentally retarded. Baltimore: University Park Press.
SHEPP, B. E. (1962). Some cue properties of anticipated rewards in discrimination learning of retardates. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 55, 856–859.
TRAPOLD, M. (1970). Are expectancies based upon different positive reinforcing events discriminably different. Learning and Motivation, 1, 129–140.
URCUIOLI, P. J. (1985). On the role of differential sample behaviors in matching-to-sample. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 502–519.
WEINER, H. (1983). Some thoughts on discrepant human-animal performances under schedules of reinforcement. The Psychological Record, 33, 521–532.
WRIGHT, A. A., COOK, R. G., RIVERA, J. J., SANDS, S. R., & DELIUS, J. D. (1988). Concept learning by pigeons: Matching-to-sample with trial-unique video picture stimuli. Animal Learning and Behavior, 16, 436–444.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Nichd Grants Hd 22218 and Hd 04147. We thank Russ Maguire, Pam Molton, and Sylvia Kannler for assistance in data collection. We also thank Vincent Strulli and the staff of the New England Center for Autism for their cooperation.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dube, W.V., Rocco, F.J. & McIlvane, W.J. Delayed Matching to Sample With Outcome-Specific Contingencies in Mentally Retarded Humans. Psychol Rec 39, 483–492 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395076
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395076