Abstract
Male Japanese quail learned to approach a light that predicted visual exposure to a female quail. In Experiment 1, duration of visual exposure to the female did not systematically affect the speed or strength of conditioning. Introduction of an omission contingency for approach to the light after acquisition did not suppress conditioned approach relative to the performance of yoked controls. In Experiment 2, males learned to approach a light that predicted visual exposure to a female despite an omission contingency for approach in effect during acquisition. Experimental males were not slower to acquire the approach response under an omission contingency than were yoked controls. The findings indicate strong Pavlovian control of sexual conditioned approach in Japanese quail.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bermant, G. (1961). Response latencies of female rats during sexual intercourse.Science,133, 1771–1773.
Deni, R. (1977a). Duration of exposures to a conspecific and social inhibition of operant behavior in Japanese quail.Psychological Reports,41, 63–70.
Déni, R. (1977b). Inhibition of operant responding in Japanese quail during visual exposure to a companion.Perceptual & Motor Skills,44, 251–257.
Déni, R. (1978). Social influences on operant behavior in Japanese quail: Sex differences among subjects, and sex and age differences among companions.Psychological Record,28, 95–108.
Domjan, M. (1987). Photoperiodic and endocrine control of social proximity behavior in male Japanese quail (Coturnix cotumix japonica).Behavioral Neuroscience,101, 385–392.
Domjan, M., Greene, P., &North, N. C. (1989). Contextual conditioning of the control of copulatory behavior by species-specific sign stimuli in Japanese quail.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,15, 147–153.
Domjan, M., &Hall, S. (1986). Determinants of social proximity in Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica): Male behavior.Journal of Comparative Psychology,100, 59–67.
Domjan, M., &Holus, K. L. (1988). Reproductive behavior: A potential model system for adaptive specializations in learning. In R. C. Bolles & M. D. Beecher (Eds.),Evolution and behavior (pp. 213–237). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Domjan, M., Lyons, R., North, N. C., &Bruell, J. (1986). Sexual Pavlovian conditioned approach behavior in male Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica).Journal of Comparative Psychology,100, 413–421.
Domjan, M., O’Vary, D., &Greene, P. (1988). Conditioning of appetitive and consummatory sexual behavior in male Japanese quail.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,50, 505–515.
Everitt, B. J., Fray, P., Kostarczyk, E., Taylor, S., &Stacey, P. (1987). Studies of instrumental behavior with sexual reinforcement in male rats (Rattus norvegicus): I. Control by brief visual stimuli paired with a receptive female.Journal of Comparative Psychology,101, 395–406.
Farris, H. (1967). Classical conditioning of courting behavior in the Japanese quailCoturnix coturnix japonica.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,10, 213–217.
Hearst, E., Jenkins, H. M. (1974).Sign-tracking: The stimulus reinforcer relation and directed action. Austin, TX: Psychonomic Society.
Holland, P. C. (1979). Differential effects of omission contingencies on various components of Pavlovian appetitive conditioned responding in rats.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,5, 178–193.
Hollis, K. L., Cadieux, E. L., &Colbert, M. M. (1989). The biological function of Pavlovian conditioning: A mechanism for mating success in the blue gourami (Trichogaster trichopterus).Journal of Comparative Psychology,103, 115–121.
Holloway, K., &Domjan, M. (in press). Sexual approach conditioning in an avian model: Unconditioned stimulus factors.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes.
Johnsgard, P. A. (1988).The quails, partridges, and francolins of the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Locurto, C. M. (1981). Contributions of autoshaping to the partitioning of conditioned behavior. In C. M. Locurto, H. S. Terrace, & J. Gibbon (Eds.),Autoshaping and conditioning theory (pp. 101–135). New York: Academic Press.
Lucas, G. A. (1975). The control of keypecks during automaintenance by prekeypeck omission training.Animal Learning & Behavior,3, 33–36.
Nash, S., &Domjan, M. (1991). Learning to discriminate the sex of conspecifics in male Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica): Tests of “biological constraints”.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,17, 342–353.
Nash, S., Domjan, M., &Askins, M. (1989). Sexual-discrimination learning in male Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica).Journal of Comparative Psychology,103, 347–358.
Orcutt, F. S., Jr., &Orcutt, A. B. (1976). Nesting and parental behavior in domestic common quail.Auk,93, 135–141.
Peden, B. F., Browne, M. P., &Hearst, E. (1977). Persistent approaches to a signal for food despite omission for approaching.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,3, 377–399.
Potash, L. M. (1975). An experimental analysis of the use of location calls by Japanese quail,Coturnix coturnix japonica. Behaviour,54, 153–179.
Schwartz, B. (1973). Maintenance of keypecking in pigeons by a food avoidance but not by a shock avoidance contingency.Animal Learning & Behavior,1, 164–166.
Schwartz, C. W., &Schwartz, E. R. (1949).A reconnaissance of the game birds in Hawaii. Hilo: Board of Commissioners on Agriculture and Forestry.
Sefton, A. E., &Siegel, P. B. (1973). Mating behavior of Japanese quail.Poultry Science,52, 1001–1007.
Sheffield, F. D. (1965). Relation between classical conditioning and instrumental learning. In W. F. Prokasy (Ed.),Classical conditioning (pp. 302–322). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Stevens, V. C. (1961). Experimental study of nesting by Coturnix quail.Journal of Wildlife Management,25, 99–101.
Taka-Tsukasa, N. (1967).The birds of Nippon. Tokyo: Maruzen.
Tomie, A., Brooks, W., &Zito, B. (1989). Sign-tracking: The search for reward. In S. B. Klein & R. R. Mowrer (Eds.),Contemporary learning theories: Pavlovian conditioning and the status of learning theory (pp. 191–223). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wasserman, E. A., Franklin, S. R., &Hearst, E. (1974). Pavlovian appetitive contingencies and approach versus withdrawal to conditioned stimuli in pigeons.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,86, 616–627.
Wessells, M. G. (1974). The effects of reinforcement upon the prepecking behaviors in the autoshaping experiment.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,21, 125–144.
Williams, D. R., &Williams, H. (1969). Automaintenance in the pigeon: Sustained pecking despite contingent nonreinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,12, 511–520.
Zamble, E., Hadad, G. M., Mitchell, J. B., &Cutmore, T. R. H. (1985). Pavlovian conditioning of sexual arousal: First- and second-order effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,11, 598–610.
Zamble, E., Mitchell, J. B., &Findlay, H. (1986). Pavlovian conditioning of sexual arousal: Parametric and background manipulations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,12, 403–411.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by National Research Service Award MH09988 to L.L.C. and National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH39940 to M.D.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Crawford, L.L., Domjan, M. Sexual approach conditioning: Omission contingency tests. Animal Learning & Behavior 21, 42–50 (1993). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197975
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197975