Abstract
In two matching-to-sample experiments, pigeons’ performance with samples of stimuli (red and green), number of responses (1 and 20), and reinforcers (food and no food) was assessed. Samples of red, 20 responses, and food were associated with the red comparison stimulus, and samples of green, 1 response, and no food were associated with the green comparison stimulus. On interference trials, three sample types were presented on each trial, and two of the samples (congruent) were associated with the correct comparison and the third sample (incongruent), with the incorrect comparison. Performance on interference trials was compared with that on control trials in which either two (Experiment 1) or three (Experiment 2) congruent samples were presented. It was found that presentation of an incongruent sample reduced matching accuracy markedly, and about equally, whether samples were presented successively or in compound. Although the type of sample that was incongruent was without effect, matching accuracy declined strongly as the recency of the incongruent sample increased. Serial position of the incongruent sample also influenced the shape of the retention function on interference trials. Presentation of the incongruent sample either first or second resulted in accuracy decreasing across the retention interval, whereas presentation of the incongruent sample last in the input sequence resulted in increasing accuracy across the retention interval. The theoretical implications of the findings are considered.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Reference Notes
Grant, D. S.Intratrial proactive interference in pigeon short-term memory: Effect of stimulus dimension and dimensional change. Manuscript submitted for publication, July 1981.
References
D’Amato, M. R. Delayed matching and short-term memory in monkeys. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 7). New York: Academic Press, 1973.
Grant, D. S. Proactive interference in pigeon short-term memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1975,1, 207–220.
Grant, D. S. Short-term memory in the pigeon. In N. E. Spear & R. R. Miller (Eds.),Information processing in animals: Memory mechanisms. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1982.
Grant, D. S. Prospective vs retrospective coding of samples of stimuli, responses, and reinforcers in delayed matching with pigeons.Learning and Motivation, in press.
Grant, D. S., &Roberts, W. A. Trace interaction in pigeon short-term memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973,101, 21–29.
Maki, W. S., Moe, J. C., &Bierley, C. M. Short-term memory for stimuli, responses, and reinforcers.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1977,3, 156–177.
Roberts, W. A., &Grant, D. S. Short-term memory in the pigeon with presentation time precisely controlled.Learning and Motivation, 1974,5, 393–408.
Roberts, W. A., &Grant, D. S. Studies of short-term memory in the pigeon using the delayed matching-to-sample procedure. In D. L. Medin, W. A. Roberts, & R. T. Davis (Eds.),Processes of animal memory. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1976.
Roberts, W. A., &Kraemer, P. J. Recognition memory for lists of visual stimuli in monkeys and humans.Animal Learning & Behavior, 1981,9, 587–594.
Sands, S. F., &Wright, A. A. Serial probe recognition performance by a rhesus monkey and a human with 10- and 20-item lists.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1980,6, 386–396.
Shimp, C. P., &Moffitt, M. Short-term memory in the pigeon: Stimulus-response associations.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1974,22, 507–512.
Shimp, C. P., &Moffitt, M. Short-term memory in the pigeon: Delayed-pair-comparison procedures and some results.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1977,28, 13–25.
Thompson, R. K. R., &Herman, L. M. Memory for lists of sounds by the bottle-nosed dolphin: Convergence of memory processes with humans?Science, 1977,195, 501–503.
Wagner, A. R. Expectancies and the priming of STM. In S. H. Hulse, H. Fowler, & W. K. Honig (Eds.),Cognitive processes in animal behavior. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1978.
Wagner, A. R., &Pfautz, P. L. A bowed serial-position function in habituation of sequential stimuli.Animal Learning & Behavior, 1978,6, 395–400.
Zentall, T. R., &Hogan, D. E. Memory in the pigeon: Proactive inhibition in a delayed matching task.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1974,4, 109–112.
Zentall, T. R., &Hogan, D. E. Short-term proactive inhibition in the pigeon.Learning and Motivation, 1977,8, 367–386.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This work was supported by Grant A0443 from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Grant, D.S. Samples of stimuli, responses, and reinforcers: Effect of incongruent sample type, serial position, and mode of presentation. Animal Learning & Behavior 10, 7–14 (1982). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212040
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212040