Abstract
Pigeons received variable-interval (VI) reinforcement for keypecking during randomized presentations of seven line-orientation stimuli forming a continuum ranging from horizontal (0 deg) to vertical (90 deg). Each line presentation lasted for 30 sec and was preceded and followed by 30-sec time-outs. After responding stabilized, only responding in the two extreme stimuli (0 and 90 deg) was reinforced. As discrimination training proceeded, strong behavioral contrast and dimensional contrast effects appeared. However, only marginal local effects (local contrast and local dimensional effects), exerted by one line-orientation component upon a second, appeared, indicating that behavioral and dimensional contrast may be independent of parallel local effects. An attempt was made to apply Blough’s (1975) quantitative model of operant generalization and discrimination to the present discrimination procedure. However, this model did not predict the generalization gradient shape that was experimentally obtained. This experiment also yielded two serendipitous findings: (1) Positive behavioral contrast appeared in an extinction-related stimulus (time-out) when other stimuli were switched from reinforcement to extinction (hitherto, positive behavioral contrast had been observed only in responding to a reinforcementrelated stimulus when other stimuli were switched from reinforcement to extinction), and (2) final responding was higher in the presence of an extinction stimulus that had always been an extinction stimulus than it was in the presence of other extinction stimuli that had previously been paired with VI reinforcement.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Aronson, E., &Linder, D. Gain and loss of esteem as determinants of interpersonal attractiveness.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1965,1, 156–171.
Blough, D. S. Steady state data and a quantitative model of operant generalization and discrimination.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1975,104, 3–21.
Boneau, C. A., &Axelrod, S. Work decrement and reminiscence in pigeon operant responding.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1962,64, 352–354.
Catania, A. C., &Gill, C. A. Inhibition and behavioral contrast.Psychonomic Science, 1964,1, 257–258.
Farthing, G. W. Behavioral contrast with multiple positive and negative stimuli on a continuum.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1974,22, 419–425.
Ferster, C. B., &Skinner, B. F. Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957.
Gamzu, E., &Schwartz, B. The maintenance of keypecking by stimulus-contingent and response-independent food presentation.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1973,19, 65–72.
Hinson, J. M., &Malone, J. C. Local contrast and maintained generalization.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1980,34, 263–272.
Hinson, J. M., &Staddon, J. E. R. Behavioral competition: A mechanism for schedule interactions.Science, 1978,202, 432–434.
Mackintosh, N. J. The psychology of animal learning. New York: Academic Press, 1974.
Mackintosh, N. J., Little, L., &Lord, J. Some determinants of behavioral contrast in pigeons and rats.Learning and Motivation, 1972,3, 148–161.
Malone, J. C. Local contrast and Pavlovian induction.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1976,26, 425–440.
Malone, J. C., & Rowe, D. W. Local contrast, local dimensional effects, and dimensional contrast. In M. L. Commons & J. A. Nevin (Eds.),Quantitative studies of operant behavior: Discriminative properties of reinforcement schedules. Cambridge, Mass: Ballinger, in press.
Malone, J. C., &Staddon, J. E. R. Contrast effects in maintained generalization gradients.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1973,19, 167–179.
Nevin, J. A., &Shettleworth, S. J. An analysis of contrast effects in multiple schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1966,9, 305–315.
Pavlov, I. P. [Conditioned reflexes] (G. V. Anrep, trans.). New York: Dover, 1927.
Reynolds, G. S. An analysis of interactions in a multiple schedule.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1961,4, 107–117.(a)
Reynolds, G. S. Behavior contrast.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1961,4, 57–71. (b)
Reynolds, G. S. Contrast, generalization, and the process of discrimination.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1961,4, 289–294. (c)
Reynolds, G. S., &Catania, A. C. Behavioral contrast with fixed-interval and low-rate reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1961,4, 387–391.
Rilling, M. Stimulus control and inhibitory processes. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.),Handbook of operant behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall, 1977.
Schwartz, B., &Gamzu, E. Pavlovian control of operant behavior: An analysis of autoshaping and its implications for operant conditioning. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.),Handbook of operant behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall, 1977.
Skinner, B. F. The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century, 1938.
Spence, K. W. The differential response in animals to stimuli varying within a single dimension.Psychological Review, 1937,44, 430–444.
Terrace, H. S. Discrimination learning with and without errors.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1963,6, 1–27.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rowe, D.W., Malone, J.C. Multiple-schedule interactions and discrimination. Animal Learning & Behavior 9, 115–126 (1981). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212033
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212033