Abstract
In two experiments, a maintained generalization procedure was employed to examine stimulus control of pigeons’ responses to a visual wavelength continuum. For both experiments, pigeons’ responses were periodically reinforced during wavelength values from one end of a continuum, while responses during other stimulus values were extinguished. In Experiment 1, the set of positive stimulus values remained constant, while the spacing of the set of negative stimuli varied. In Experiment 2, the set of negative stimulus values remained constant, while the spacing of positive stimuli varied. Positive dimensional contrast effects were obtained in both experiments. In general, the results indicated that variation in the spacing of negative stimuli had little effect on positive dimensional contrast. However, variation in the spacing of positive stimuli produced changes in the peak of the dimensional contrast gradient, without apparent change in the magnitude of the effect.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Blough, D. S. (1975). Steady-state generalization and a quantitative model of operant generalization and discrimination.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,104, 3–21.
Blough, D. S. (1983). Alternative accounts of dimensional stimulus control. In M. Commons, R. Herrnstein, & A. Wagner (Eds.),Quantitative analyses of behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 59–72). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Blough, P. M. (1980). Behavioral and dimensional contrast in rats.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,33, 345–357.
Blough, P. M., &Blough, D. S. (1985). Sequential effects in dimensional contrast.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,44, 233–244.
Boneau, C. A., &Cole, J. L. (1967). Decision theory, the pigeon, and the psychophysical function.Psychological Review,74, 123–135.
Catania, A. C., &Gill, C. A. (1964). Inhibition and behavioral contrast.Psychonomic Science,1, 257–258.
Essock, S. M., &Blough, D. S. (1977). Effects of stimulus spacing on steady-state gradients of inhibitory stimulus control.Animal Learning & Behavior,5, 174–176.
Farthing, G. W. (1974). Behavioral contrast with multiple positive and negative stimuli on a continuum.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,22, 419–425.
Heinemann, E., &Chase, S. (1975). Stimulus generalization. In W. K. Estes (Ed.),Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (Vol. 2, pp. 305–349). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hinson, J. M. (1988). Absolute and relative measures of dimensional contrast.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,50, 249–260.
Hinson, J. M., &Lockhead, G. R. (1986). Range effects in successive discrimination.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,12, 270–276.
Hinson, J. M., &Malone, J. C., Jr. (1980). Local contrast and maintained generalization.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,34, 263–272.
Honig, W. K., &Urcuioli, P. J. (1981). The legacy of Guttman and Kalish (1956): 25 years of research on stimulus generalization.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,36, 405–445.
Kalish, H. I., &Guttman, N. (1959). Stimulus generalization after training on three stimuli: A test of the summation hypothesis.Journal of Experimental Psychology,57, 268–272.
Malone, J. C., Jr. (1975). Stimulus-specific contrast effects during operant discrimination learning.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,24, 281–289.
Malone, J. C., Jr., &Rowe, D. W. (1981). Local contrast, local dimensional effects, and dimensional contrast. In M. Commons & J. A. Nevin (Eds.),Quantitative analyses of behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 365–390). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Malone, J. C., Jr., &Staddon, J. E. R. (1973). Contrast effects in maintained generalization gradients.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,19, 167–179.
Newlin, R. J., Rodgers, J. P., &Thomas, D. R. (1979). Two determinants of the peak shift in human voluntary stimulus generalization.Perception & Psychophysics,25, 478–486.
Ratliff, F. (1965).Mach bands: Quantitative studies on neural networks in the retina. San Francisco: Holden-Day.
Reynolds, G. S. (1961). Contrast, generalization, and the process of discrimination.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,4, 289–294.
Rowe, D. W. (1981).Multiple schedule interactions and a model of operant discrimination. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
Rowe, D. W., &Malone, J. C., Jr. (1981). Multiple schedule interactions and discrimination.Animal Learning & Behavior,9, 115–126.
Spence, K. W. (1937). The differential response in animals to stimuli varying within a single dimension.Psychological Review,44, 430–444.
Stevenson, J. G. (1966). Stimulus generalization: The ordering and spacing of test stimuli.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,9, 457–468.
Thomas, D. R., &Jones, C. G. (1962). Stimulus generalization as a function of the frame of reference.Journal of Experimental Psychology,64, 77–80.
Thomas, D. R., Strub, H., &Dickson, J. F. (1974) Adaptation level theory and the central tendency effect in stimulus generalization.Journal of Experimental Psychology,103, 446–474.
Thomas, D. R., Windell, B. T., Williams, J. L., &White, K. G. (1985). Stimulus presentation frequency in brightness discrimination and generalization: A test of adaptation level and signal detection interpretations.Perception & Psychophysics,37, 243–248.
White, K. G., &Thomas, D. R. (1979). Postdiscrimination stimulus generalization in humans: An extension of Galizio and Baron.Perception & Psychophysics,7, 564–565.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by funds provided by National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH40275-01 to Washington State University. Experiment 1 was part of a dissertation submitted by Jennifer J. Higa in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the doctoral degree at Washington State University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hinson, J.M., Higa, J.J. Stimulus variation and dimensional contrast. Animal Learning & Behavior 17, 31–38 (1989). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205210
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205210