Advertisement

The Psychological Record

, Volume 40, Issue 3, pp 411–428 | Cite as

Symbolic Matching-To-Sample Employing Pictorial Stimulus Classes

  • Richard Pisacreta
Article

Abstract

Four pigeons were trained on a 6-key modified symbolic matching-to-sample procedure. The stimuli were paired based on humanly defined stimulus classes, for example, faces, signs, playing cards, trees, birds, and butterflies. The second peck on the sample key lighted only one comparison key. Every two pecks on the sample lighted another comparison key, up to a maximum of five keys. Pecks on keys of symbolically matching pictures (e.g., if the sample was a face, the bird pecked the comparison key that presented another face) produced grain. Pecks on nonmatching keys (e.g., pictures of signs or playing cards) turned off all lights on the comparison keys and repeated the trial. The birds learned to peck each sample until the symbolically matching comparison stimulus appeared on one of the five comparison stimulus keys, and then to peck that key. Later, the birds showed symbolic matching transfer to novel samples, novel comparison stimuli, and some novel stimulus classes. The birds showed better transfer with visually similar (tree-tree) relative to visually dissimilar (cups-butterflies) stimulus pairs, and learned to avoid the sample stimulus when it appeared as an incorrect comparison stimulus choice.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. CARTER, D. E., & ECKERMAN, D. A. (1975). Symbolic matching by pigeons: Rate of learning complex discriminations predicted by simple discriminations. Science, 187, 662–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. CERELLA, J. (1979). Visual classes and natural categories in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 68–77.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. COHEN, L. R., LOONEY, T. A., BRADY, J. H., & AUCELLA, A. F. (1976). Differential sample response schedules in the acquisition of conditional discriminations by pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 26, 301–314.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. CUMMING, W. W., & BERRYMAN, R. (1965). The complex discriminated operant: Studies of matching-to-sample and related problems. In D. I. Mostofsky (Ed.), Stimulus generalization (pp. 284–330). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. FARTHING, G. W., & OPUDA, M. J. (1974). Transfer of matching-to-sample in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 199–213.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. HERRNSTEIN, R. J., LOVELAND, D. H., & CABLE, C. (1976). Natural concepts in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 2, 285–311.Google Scholar
  8. HOLMES, P. W. (1979). Transfer of matching performance in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 31, 103–114.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. KELLER, F. S., & SCHOENFELD, W. N. (1950). Principles of psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  10. LOMBARDI, C. M., FACHINELLI, C. C, & DELUIS, J. D. (1984). Oddity of visual patterns conceptualized by pigeons. Animal Learning & Behavior, 12, 2–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. MALOTT, R. W., & SIDDALL, J. W. (1972). Acquisition of the people concept in pigeons. Psychological Reports, 31, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. PAUL, C. (1983). Ratio effects in matching-to-sample. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39, 77–85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. PISACRETA, R. (1989). Some factors that influence transfer of oddity performance in the pigeon. The Psychological Record, 39, 221–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. PISACRETA, R. (1990). Rudimentary rule-governed behavior in the pigeon. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, S. M. Kosslyn, & D. B. Mumford (Eds.), Quantitative analyses of behavior, Vol. 8: Behavioral approaches to pattern recognition and concept formation (pp. 23–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  15. PISACRETA, R., LEFAVE, P., LESNESKI, T, & POTTER, C. (1985). Transfer of oddity learning in the pigeon. Animal Learning & Behavior, 13(4), 403–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. PISACRETA, R., POTTER, C., & LEFAVE, P. (1984). Matching of varying-size form stimuli in the pigeon. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22(6), 591–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. PISACRETA, R., REDWOOD, T., & WITT, K. (1984). Transfer of matching to figure samples in the pigeon. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 42, 223–237.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. PISACRETA, R., & RILLING, M. (1987). Infrared touch technology as a response detector in animal research. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 19(4), 389–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. POOLE, J., & LANDER, D. G. (1971). The pigeon’s concept of people. Psychonomic Science, 25, 157–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. PREMACK, D. (1978). On the abstractness of human concepts: Why it would be difficult to talk to a pigeon. In S. H. Hulse, H. Fowler, & W. K. Honig (Eds.), Cognitive processes in animal behavior (pp. 423–451). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. URCUIOLI, P. J. & NEVIN, J. A. (1975). Transfer of hue matching in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 24, 149–155.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. WHITE, K. G., & Mckenzie, J. (1982). Delayed stimulus control: Recall for single and relational stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 38, 305–312.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. WRIGHT, A. A., COOK, R. G., RIVERA, J. J., SANDS, S. F., & DELIUS, J. D. (1988). Concept learning by pigeons; Matching-to-sample with trial-unique video picture stimuli. Animal Learning & Behavior, 16(4), 436–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ZENTALL, T. R., & HOGAN, D. E. (1978). Same/different concept learning in the pigeon: The effect of negative instances and prior adaption to transfer stimuli. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 30, 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Pisacreta
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Social SciencesFerris State UniversityBig RapidsUSA

Personalised recommendations