Abstract
In Experiments 1 and 2, honeybee foragers visiting the laboratory were fed on targets of two different colors, one containing 5 μl and the other containing 20 μl of 50% sucrose solution. The targets were presented singly in quasi-random sequences on the training visits, after which preference was measured in an unrewarded choice test. In Experiment 1, 16 differentially rewarded training trials with each color were followed by the same number of trials with the color-amount relation reversed; no preference for either color was found in the subsequent choice test. In Experiment 2, 20 differentially rewarded training trials with each color—enough to produce a clear preference for the 20-μl color when given directly after pretraining—were given after 10 feedings to repletion on each color that were calculated to generate near-asymptotic associative strength; no preference for either color was found in the subsequent choice test. In Experiment 3, there were 12 feedings to repletion on one color and, on the other, 12 feedings to repletion followed by 15 trials with a small (5 μl) reward; no preference was found in a subsequent choice test. The results of all three experiments support a nonrepresentational interpretation of the role of amount of reward in the learning of honeybees.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bitterman, M. E. (1987). Evidence of divergence in vertebrate learning.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,10, 659–660.
Bitterman, M. E. (1988). Vertebrate-invertebrate comparisons. In H. J. Jerison & I. L. Jerison (Eds.),Intelligence and evolutionary biology (pp. 251–275). Berlin: Springer.
Buchanan, G. M., &Bitterman, M. E. (1988). Learning in honeybees as a function of amount and frequency of reward.Animal Learning & Behavior,16, 247–255.
Campbell, P. E., Batsche, C. J., &Batsche, G. M. (1972). Spaced-trials reward magnitude effects in the rat: Single versus multiple food pellets.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,81, 360–364.
Capaldi, E. D. (1970). Effect of initial reinforcer magnitude on subsequent resistance to extinction.Journal of Experimental Psychology,86, 283–287.
Capaldi, E. J., &Lynch, D. (1967). Repeated shifts in reward magnitude: Evidence in favor of an associational and absolute (noncontextual) interpretation.Journal of Experimental Psychology,75, 226–235.
Couvillon, P. A., &Bitterman, M. E. (1984). The overlearning-extinction effect and successive negative contrast in honeybees (Apis mellifera).Journal of Comparative Psychology,98, 100–109.
Couvillon, P. A., &Bitterman, M. E. (1988). Compound-component and conditional discrimination of colors and odors by honeybees: Further tests of a continuity model.Animal Learning & Behavior,16, 67–74.
Couvillon, P. A., &Bitterman, M. E. (1989). Reciprocal overshadowing in the discrimination of color-odor compounds by honeybees: Further tests of a continuity model.Animal Learning & Behavior,17, 213–222.
Crespi, L. P. (1942). Quantitative variation of incentive and performance in the white rat.American Journal of Psychology,55, 467–517.
Daly, H. B., &Daly, J. T. (1982). A mathematical model of reward and aversive nonreward: Its application in over 30 appetitive learning situations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,111, 441–480.
Davenport, J. W. (1970). Species generality of within-subjects reward magnitude effects.Canadian Journal of Psychology,24, 1–7.
Elliott, R. M. (1928). The effect of change of reward on the maze performance of rats.University of California Publications in Psychology,4, 19–40.
Flaherty, C. F. (1982). Incentive contrast: A review of behavioral changes following shifts in reward.Animal Learning & Behavior,10, 409–440.
Gonzalez, R. C., Potts, A., Pitcoff, K., &Bitterman, M. E. (1972). Runway performance of goldfish as a function of complete and incomplete reduction in amount of reward.Psychonomic Science,27, 305–307.
Grossmann, K. E. (1970). Erlernen von Farbreizen an der Futterquelle durch Honigbienen während des Anflugs und während des Saugens.Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie,27, 553–562.
Hill, W. F., &Spear, N. E. (1963). Choice between magnitudes of reward in a T maze.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,56, 723–726.
Hull, C. L. (1943).Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1974).The psychology of animal learning. London: Academic Press.
Menzel, R., &Erber, J. (1972). The influence of the quantity of reward on the learning performance in honeybees.Behavior,41, 27–42.
Pert, A., &Bitterman, M. E. (1970). Reward and learning in the turtle.Learning & Motivation,1, 121–128.
Rescorla, R. A., &Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.),Classical conditioning: Vol. 2. Current research and theory (pp. 64–99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Spence, K. W. (1956).Behavior theory and conditioning. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Tinklepaugh, O. L. (1928). An experimental study of representative factors in monkeys.Journal of Comparative Psychology,8, 197–236.
Tolman, E. C. (1932).Purposive behavior in animals and men. New York: Century.
Zeaman, D. (1949). Response latency as a function of the amount of reinforcement.Journal of Experimental Psychology,39, 466–483.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant BNS-8709785 from the National Science Foundation.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Buchanan, G.M., Bitterman, M.E. Learning in honeybees as a function of amount of reward: Tests of the equal-asymptote assumption. Animal Learning & Behavior 17, 475–480 (1989). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205229
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205229