Abstract
Pigeons trained on a conditional event-duration discrimination typically “choose short” when retention intervals are inserted between samples and comparisons. In two experiments, we tested the hypothesis that this effect results from ambiguity produced by the similarity of the novel retention intervals and the familiar intertrial interval by training pigeons with retention intervals from the outset and, for one group, in addition, making retention intervals distinctive from the intertrial intervals. In Experiment 1, when the retention intervals (0–4 sec) were not distinctive from the intertrial intervals, the pigeons did not show a clear choose-short effect even when extended retention intervals (8 sec) were introduced. When the retention intervals were distinctive, the pigeons showed a choose-long effect (they appeared to time through the retention interval), but it was relatively weak until the retention intervals were extended to 8 sec. In Experiment 2, when pigeons were discouraged from timing through the retention intervals by making the intertrial intervals and retention intervals salient distinct events and using long (up to 16-sec) retention intervals in training, parallel retention functions were found. It appears that when ambiguity is removed, forgetting by pigeons does not occur by the process of subjective shortening. These experiments suggest that the accurate interpretation of results of animal memory research using differential-duration samples must consider the novelty of the retention intervals on test trials as well as their similarity to other trial events.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Dougherty, D. H., &Wixted, J. T. (1996). Detecting a nonevent: Delayed presence-vs.-absence discrimination in pigeons.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,65, 81–92.
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., &Kelly, R. (1998). The effect of variable-delay training on coding of event duration in pigeons.Learning & Motivation,29, 49–67.
Grant, D. S., &Spetch, M. L. (1991). Pigeons’ memory for event duration: Differences between choice and successive matching tasks.Learning & Motivation,22, 180–190.
Grant, D. S., &Spetch, M. L. (1993). Analogical and nonanalogical coding of samples differing in duration in a choice-matching task in pigeons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,17, 186–193.
Kraemer, P. J., Mazmanian, D. S., &Roberts, W. A. (1985). The choose-short effect in pigeon memory for stimulus duration: Subjective shortening versus coding models.Animal Learning & Behavior,13, 349–354.
Roberts, W. A., Macuda, T., &Brodbeck, D. R. (1995). Memory for number of light flashes in the pigeons.Animal Learning & Behavior,23, 182–188.
Santi, A., Stanford, L., &Coyle, J. (1998). Pigeons’ memory for event duration: Differences between visual and auditory signals.Animal Learning & Behavior,26, 163–171.
Santi, A., Weise, L., &Kuiper, D. (1995). Memory for event duration in rats.Learning & Motivation,26, 83–100.
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., Grant, D. S., &Kelly, R. (1996). Procedural determinants of coding processes in pigeons’ memory for duration.Learning & Motivation,27, 179–199.
Spetch, M. L., &Rusak, B. (1992). Time present and time past. In W. K. Honig & J. G. Fetterman (Eds.),Cognitive aspects of stimulus control (pp. 47–67). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Spetch, M. L., &Wilkie, D. M. (1982). A systematic bias in pigeons’ memory for food and light durations.Behavior 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 pace-maker free theory of interval timing.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,71, 215–251.
Weaver, J. E., Dorrance, B. R., &Zentall, T. R. (1999). Present /absent sample matching in pigeons: Is comparison choice controlled by the sample stimulus or by differential sample responding?Animal Learning & Behavior,27, 288–294.
Wilkie, D. M., &Willson, R. J. (1990). Discriminable distance analysis supports the hypothesis that pigeons retrospectively encode event duration.Animal Learning & Behavior,18, 124–132.
Zentall, T. R. (1998). Symbolic representation in animals: Emergent stimulus relations in conditional discrimination learning.Animal Learning & Behavior,26, 363–377.
Zentall, T. R., Kaiser, D. H., Clement, T. S., Weaver, J. E., &Campbell, G. (2000). Presence/absence-sample matching by pigeons: Divergent retention functions may result from the similarity of behavior during the absence sample and the retention interval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,26, 294–304.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant IBN 941489 and National Institute of Mental Health Grants 55118 and 59194.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dorrance, B.R., Kaiser, D.H. & Zentall, T.R. Event-duration discrimination by pigeons: The choose-short effect may result from retention-test novelty. Animal Learning & Behavior 28, 344–353 (2000). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200268
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200268