Abstract
In Experiment 1, three groups were given 20 sessions of true discrimination (TD), single- stimulus (SS), or pseudodiscrimination (PD) training with line angles and with equal-density variable-interval (VI) and variable-time (VT) reinforcement schedules, instead of the usual VI and extinction (EXT). Subsequent transfer to a wavelength VI-EXT discrimination revealed enhanced performance by TD and retarded performance by PD groups. In Experiment 2, in an autoshaping-like paradigm, six groups were given TD, SS, or PD training with line angles using fixed-interval (FI) and fixed-time (FT) reinforcement schedules during trials. Despite almost identical responding to the two stimuli, the TD groups performed best on either of two subsequent wavelength discriminations. These results suggest that neither Pavlovian contingencies nor differential responding during training is required in order to produce the TD enhancement effect.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bresnahan, E. L. Effects of extradimensional pseudodiscrimina- tion training upon stimulus control. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 85, 155–156.
Eck, K. L., Noel, R. C, & Thomas, D. R. Discrimination learning as a function of prior discrimination and nondifferential training. Journal of Experimental Psychology; 1969, 82, 156–162.
Hall, G., & Honig, W. K. Stimulus control after extradimensional training in pigeons: A comparison of response contingent and noncontingent training procedures. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1974, 87, 945–952.
Honig, W. K. Attentional factors governing the slope of the generalization gradient. In R. M. Gilbert & N. S. Sutherland (Eds.), Animal discrimination learning. London: Academic Press, 1969.
Newlin, R. J., & LoLordo, V. M. A comparison of pecking generated by serial, delay and trace autoshaping procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1976, 25, 227–241.
Newlin, R. J., & Thomas, D. R. Nondifferential training retards acquisition of subsequent discriminations involving other stimuli. Animal Learning & Behavior, 1978, 6, 385–390.
Tomie, A., Davitt, G. A., & Engberg, L. A. Stimulus generalization of autoshaped key-pecking following interdimensional and extradimensional training. Learning and Motivation, 1976, 7,240–253.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by a research grant from NSF (BNS 78-01407) to David R. Thomas. It was presented at the 1979 meetings of the Midwestern Psychological Association in Chicago. The authors would like to thank Thomas B. Moye for his assistance.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Newlin, R.J., Thomas, D.R. Pavlovian vs. operant factors in nonspecific transfer of training in the pigeon. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 16, 251–254 (1980). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329535
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329535