Abstract
In Experiment 1, 12 pigeons were given eight sessions of VI single stimulus training with a color in a particular context followed by eight sessions of similar training with a line angle in another context. On the next day, half of the subjects were tested for wavelength and angularity generalization in each of the two contexts, a procedure that was thus consistent with training for one dimension and inconsistent for the other. The subjects made significantly more responses to each training stimulus under the consistent context condition, but there was no difference in absolute or relative generalization slopes. In Experiment 2, 12 pigeons were trained as in Experiment 1, but during generalization testing they were exposed to both contexts sequentially. Under the consistent context condition, the subjects responded more to the two training stimuli and yielded sharper absolute and relative wavelength generalization gradients: Under the inconsistent context condition, responding to the training wavelength was substantially disrupted. Thus, under appropriate testing conditions, contextual control over both the amount and the selectivity of responding can be demonstrated.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Butter, C. M. Stimulus generalization along one and two dimensions in pigeons.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1963,65, 339–346.
Greenspoon, J., &Ranyard, R. Stimulus conditions and retroactive inhibition.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1957,53, 55–59.
Kamin, L. J. Predictability, surprise, attention and conditioning. In B. Campbell & R. Church (Eds.),Punishment and aversive behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969.
Newlin, R. J., & Thomas, D. R. On the acquisition and measurement of stimulus control in pigeons.Animal Learning & Behavior, 1982, in press.
Rand, G., &Wapner, S. Postural status as a factor in memory.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1967,6, 268–271.
Richards, R. W. Stimulus control following training on a conditional discrimination.Animal Learning & Behavior, 1979,17, 309–312.
Spear, N. E. Forgetting as retrieval failure. In W. K. Honig & P. H. R. James (Eds.),Animal memory. New York: Academic Press, 1971.
Spear, N. E. The processing of memories: Forgetting and retention. Hiilsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1978.
Thomas, D. R. Stimulus selection, attention, and related matters. In J. H. Reynierse (Ed.),Current issues in animal learning. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1970.
Thomas, D. R., &King, R. A. Stimulus generalization as a function of the level of motivation.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959,57, 323–328.
Thomas, D. R., &Lopez, L. J. The effect of delayed testing on generalization slope.Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1962,44, 541–544.
Thomas, D. R., McKelvie, A. R., Ranney, M., &Moye, T. B. Interference in pigeons’ long-term memory viewed as a retrieval problem.Animal Learning & Behavior, 1981,9, 581–586.
Tulving, E., &Pearlstone, Z. Availability vs. accessibility of information in memory for words.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1966,5, 381–391.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by NSF Research Grant BNS-7801407. It was reported by Alan McKelvie at the April 1981 meetings of the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association in Denver.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Thomas, D.R., McKelvie, A.R. Retrieval of memory in the pigeon by context manipulations. Animal Learning & Behavior 10, 1–6 (1982). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212039
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212039