Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp 1130–1134 | Cite as

Pre-crastination in the pigeon

  • Edward A. WassermanEmail author
  • Stephen J. Brzykcy
Brief Report


Procrastination is the tendency to delay initiating or completing tasks. Rosenbaum et al. (Psychological Science, May 8, 2014) recently documented the opposite of procrastination: pre-crastination, the tendency to begin or to finish tasks as soon as possible. We devised a simple two-alternative forced-choice task, in which pigeons could choose to switch response location either sooner or later in a sequence of actions eventuating in food reward. Even though there was no economic advantage for doing so, pigeons chose to switch response location sooner rather than later in the sequence, showing pre-crastination to be quite general. Pre-crastination thus joins other anticipatory learning phenomena in challenging rational or optimal accounts of behavioral adaptation.


Animal and human associative learning Choice behavior Animal behavior 



We thank Leyre Castro and Mike O’Hara for their helpful comments and suggestions.


  1. Bhatt, R. S., & Wasserman, E. A. (1987). Choice behavior of pigeons on progressive and multiple schedules: A test of optimal foraging theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 13, 40–51.Google Scholar
  2. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cook, R. G., Brown, M. F., & Riley, D. A. (1985). Flexible memory processing by rats: Use of prospective and retrospective information in the radial maze. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 453–469.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cook, R. G., & Rosen, H. A. (2010). Temporal control of internal states in pigeons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 915–922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dennett, D. C. (1996). Kinds of minds: Towards an understanding of consciousness. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  6. Gibson, B. M., Wasserman, E. A., Frei, L., & Miller, K. (2004). Recent advances in operant conditioning technology: A versatile and affordable computerized touch screen system. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 36, 355–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hearst, E., & Jenkins, H. M. (1974). Sign-tracking: The stimulus-reinforcer relation and directed action. Austin, TX: Psychonomic Society.Google Scholar
  8. Hendry, D. P. (1969). Conditioned reinforcement. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.Google Scholar
  9. Honig, W. K., & Wasserman, E. A. (1981). Performance of pigeons on delayed simple and conditional discriminations under equivalent training procedures. Learning and Motivation, 12, 149–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Houston, A. I., & McNamara, J. M. (1999). Models of adaptive behaviour. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hurley, S., & Nudds, M. (2006). Rational animals? Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Locurto, C. W., Terrace, H. S., & Gibbon, J. (1981). Autoshaping and conditioning theory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  13. Mazur, J. E. (1996). Procrastination by pigeons: Preference for larger, more delayed work requirements. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 159–171.Google Scholar
  14. McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (2007). Prospective memory: An overview and synthesis of an emerging field. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437–442.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pithers, R. T. (1985). The roles of event contingencies and reinforcement in human autoshaping and omission responding. Learning and Motivation, 16, 210–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rosenbaum, D. A., Gong, L., & Potts, C. A. (2014). Pre-crastination: Hastening subgoal completion at the expense of extra physical effort. Psychological Science, 8, 2014.Google Scholar
  18. Simon, H. A. (1972). Theories of bounded rationality. In C. B. McGuire & R. Radner (Eds.), Decision and organization (pp. 161–176). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  19. Wasserman, E. A. (1981). Response evocation in autoshaping. In C. M. Locurto, H. S. Terrace, & J. Gibbon (Eds.), Autoshaping and conditioning theory (pp. 21–54). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  20. Wasserman, E. A., Carr, D. L., & Deich, J. D. (1978). Association of conditioned stimuli during serial conditioning by pigeons. Animal Learning & Behavior, 6, 52–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wike, E. L. (1962). Secondary reinforcement: Selected experiments. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  22. Williams, D. R., & Williams, H. (1969). Auto-maintenance in the pigeon: Sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 511–520.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zentall, T. R. (2010). Coding of stimuli by animals: Retrospection, prospection, episodic memory and future planning. Learning and Motivation, 41, 225–240.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyThe University of IowaIowa CityUSA

Personalised recommendations