Abstract
Pigeons were trained using a symbolic delayed matching-to-sample procedure involving bright versus dim houselight samples. We hypothesized that when sample stimuli differ in salience, increasing the size of the retention interval will affect performance on trials initiated by the more salient sample only. In agreement with this prediction, accuracy following the dim sample did not decline as the retention interval increased, whereas accuracy following the bright sample declined to well below 50% correct. In a second experiment, the less salient (dim) sample from Experiment 1 was arranged as the more salient sample in a sample/no-sample procedure. Accuracy on dim sample trials then declined to well below 50% correct as the retention interval increased, whereas accuracy on no-sample trials remained constant. The results suggest that when sample stimuli differ in salience, pigeons may transform the nominal discrimination task into a detection task in which they respond on the basis of the presence or absence of the more salient sample.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Colwill, R. M. (1984). Disruption of short-term memory for reinforcement by ambient illumination.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,36B, 235–258.
Fetterman, J. G., &MacEwen, D. (1989). Short-term memory for responses: The “choose-small” effect.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,52, 311–324.
Gaitan, S. C., &Wixted, J. T. (2000). The role of “nothing” in memory for event duration in pigeons.Animal Learning & Behavior,28, 147–161.
Grant, D. S. (1991). Symmetrical and asymmetrical coding of food and no-food samples in delayed matching in pigeons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,17, 186–193.
Kraemer, P. J., Brown, R. W., &Randall, C. K. (1995). Signal intensity and duration estimation in rats.Behavioural Processes,34, 265–268.
Kraemer, P. J., Randall, C. K., &Brown, R. W. (1997). The influence of stimulus attributes on duration matching-to-sample in pigeons.Animal Learning & Behavior,25, 148–157.
McCarthy, D. C., &Davison, M. (1991). The interaction between stimulus and reinforcer control on remembering.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,56, 51–66.
Schneider, B. (1987). An interval scale of brightness for the pigeon.Perception & Psychophysics,42, 371–376.
Sherburne, L. M., &Zentall, T. R. (1993). Coding of feature and no-feature events by pigeons performing a delayed conditional discrimination.Animal Learning & Behavior,21, 92–100.
Sherburne, L. M., Zentall, T. R., &Kaiser, D. H. (1998). Timing in pigeons: The choose-short effect may result from pigeons’ “confusion” between delay and intertrial intervals.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,5, 516–522.
Spetch, M. L., &Wilkie, D. M. (1982). A systematic bias in pigeons’ memory for food and light durations.Behaviour Analysis Letters,2, 267–274.
Spetch, M. L., &Wilkie, D. M. (1983). Subjective shortening: A model of pigeons’ memory for event duration.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,9, 14–30.
Staddon, J. E. R., &Higa, J. J. (1999). Time and memory: Towards a pacemaker-free theory of interval timing.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,71, 215–251.
Wallace, J., Steinert, P. A., Scobie, S. R., &Spear, N. E. (1980). Stimulus modality and short-term memory in rats.Animal Learning & Behavior,8, 10–16.
Wilkie, D. M. (1987). Stimulus intensity affects pigeons’ timing behavior: Implications for an internal clock model.Animal Learning & Behavior,15, 35–39.
Wixted, J. T. (1993). A signal detection analysis of memory for nonoccurrence in pigeons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,19, 400–411.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
These experiments were conducted while the second author was an NSF Predoctoral Fellow, and the research was supported by NIMH Grant MH55648.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wixted, J.T., Gaitan, S.C. Stimulus salience and asymmetric forgetting in the pigeon. Animal Learning & Behavior 32, 173–182 (2004). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196018
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196018