Abstract
Two groups of 6 pigeons were exposed to either a fixed-time (FT) or a variable-time (VT) schedule of response-independent food presentation. The interval between two successive food presentations (food-food [FF] interval) was either 20 or 40 sec. The duration of stimulus presentation (stimulus-food [SF] interval) was varied relative to the FF interval. All subjects were exposed to different information ratios (IRs; IR = SF/FF; IR = 1.00, 0.50, 0.15). To study the relative contribution of sign- and goal-tracking behavior to keypecking observed in standard autoshaping procedures, pigeons were autoshaped in a long-box. In the long-box, the stimulus key and the feeder are located 60 cm apart. Stimuli were always presented at one end of the box, and food was presented at the other end. Locomotor behavior and keypecks were recorded. Pigeons engaged in sign-tracking behavior when IR = 0.15, but only when presentation of the food was unpredictable on the basis of other variables (e.g., the passage of time since the last food presentation, as in FT schedules). In the case of FT schedules, subjects engaged in feeder-directed activities. No effects of varying the FF interval were found. Keypecking was observed only when the SF interval was short (IR = 0.15) and food was presented on a VT schedule.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bilbrey, J., &Winokur, S. (1973). Control for and constraints on autoshaping.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,20, 323–333.
Boakes, R. A. (1977). Performance on learning to associate a stimulus with positive reinforcement. In H. Davis & H. M. B. Hurwitz (Eds.),Operant-Pavlovian interactions. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brown, P. L., &Jenkins, H. M. (1968) Autoshaping the pigeon’s key-peck.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,11, 1–8.
Crowell, C. R., Bernhardt, P. T., &Moskal, P. (1981). On the manifestation of stimulus-directed behavior in the rat.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,17, 41–44.
Davey, G. C. L., &Cleland, G. G. (1982). The effect of partial reinforcement on the acquisition and extinction of sign-tracking and goal-tracking in the rat.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,19, 115–118.
Farwell, B. J., &Ayres, J. J. B. (1979). Stimulus-reinforcer and response-reinforcer relations in the control of conditioned appetitive headpoking (“goal tracking”) in rats.Learning & Motivation,10 295–312.
Gamzu, E., &Williams, D. R. (1971). Classical conditioning of a complex skeletal response.Science,171, 923–925.
Gibbon, J., Baldock, M. D., Locurto, C., Gold, L., &Terrace, H. (1977). Trial and intertrial durations in autoshaping.Journal of Experimental Psychology Animal Behavior Processes,3, 264–284.
Gibbon, J., Farrell, L., Locurto, C. M., Duncan, H. J., &Terrace, H. S. (1980). Partial reinforcement in autoshaping with pigeons.Animal Learning & Behavior,8, 45–49.
Hearst, E., &Jenkins, H. M. (1974).Sign tracking: The stimulus-reinforcer relation and directed action. Austin, TX: The Psychonomic Society.
Innis, N. K., Simmelhag-Grant, V. L., &Staddon, J. E. R. (1983). Behavior induced by periodic food delivery: The effects of interfood interval.Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior,39, 309–322.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1974).The psychology of animal learning. London: Academic Press.
Rescorla, R. A. (1967) Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures.Psychological Review,74, 71–80.
Schwartz, B., &Gamzu, E. (1977). Pavlovian control of operant conditioning. In W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.),Handbook of operant behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Schwartz, B., &Williams, D. R. (1972). The role of the response-reinforcer contingency in negative automaintenance.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,17, 351–357.
Staddon, J. E. R., &Simmelhag, V. L. (1971). The “superstition” experiment: A reexamination of its implications for the principles of adaptive behavior.Psychological Review,78, 3–43.
Terrace, H. S., Gibbon, J., Farrell, L., &Baldock, M. D. (1975). Temporal factors influencing the acquisition of an autoshaped keypeek.Animal Learning & Behavior,3, 53–62.
Wasserman, E. A. (1973). The effect of redundant contextual stimuli on autoshaping the pigeon’s keypeck.Animal Learning & Behavior,1, 198–206.
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.
Winer, B. J. (1962).Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by a grant from the Dutch Organization for the Advancement of Basic Research (ZWO 15-25-010) to P. Kop and F. van der Schoot at Tilburg University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
van Hest, A., van Haaren, F., Kop, P. et al. Stimulus- and feeder-directed behavior in a long-box: Effect of fixed versus variable time schedules of food presentation. Animal Learning & Behavior 14, 168–172 (1986). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200052
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200052