Abstract
When differential outcomes follow correct responses to each of two comparison stimuli in matching to sample, relative to the appropriate control condition, higher matching accuracy is typically found, especially when there is a delay between the sample and the comparison stimuli. In two experiments, we examined whether this differential-outcomes effect depends on using outcomes that differ in hedonic value (e.g., food vs. water). In Experiment 1, we found facilitated retention when a blue houselight followed correct responses to one comparison stimulus and a white houselight followed correct responses to the other, prior to nondifferential presentations of food. In Experiment 2, we found facilitated retention again when a blue houselight followed correct responses to one comparison stimulus and a tone followed correct responses to the other, prior to nondifferential presentations of food. The results of both experiments indicate that the differential-outcomes effect does not depend on a difference in hedonic value of the differential outcomes, and they suggest that outcome anticipations consisting of relatively arbitrary but differential stimulus representations can serve as cues for comparison choice.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alling, K., Nickel, M., & Poling, A. (1991). The effects of differential and nondifferential outcomes on response rates and accuracy under a delayed-matching-to-sample procedure. Psychological Record, 41, 537–549.
Astley, S. L., Peissig, J. J., & Wasserman, E. A. (2001). Superordinate categorization via learned stimulus equivalence: Quantity of reinforcement, hedonic value, and the nature of the mediator. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 27, 252–268.
Brodigan, D. L., & Peterson, G. B. (1976). Two-choice conditional discrimination performance of pigeons as a function of reward expectancy, prechoice delay, and domesticity. Learning & Behavior, 4, 121–124.
Carlson, J. G., & Wielkiewicz, R. M. (1976). Mediators of the effects of magnitude of reinforcement. Learning & Motivation, 7, 184–196.
Crespi, L. P. (1942). Quantitative variation of incentive and performance in the white rat. American Journal of Psychology, 55, 467–517.
Edwards, C. A., Jagielo, J. A., Zentall, T. R., & Hogan, D. E. (1982). Acquired equivalence and distinctiveness in matching to sample by pigeons: Mediation by reinforcer-specific expectancies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 8, 244–259.
Fedorchak, P. M., & Bolles, R. C. (1986). Differential outcome effect using a biologically neutral outcome difference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 12, 125–130.
Friedman, G. J., & Carlson, J. G. (1973). Effects of a stimulus correlated with positive reinforcement upon discrimination learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 97, 281–286.
Friedrich, A. M., & Zentall, T. R. (2004). Pigeons shift their preference toward locations of food that take more effort to obtain. Behavioural Processes, 67, 405–415.
Honig, W. K., Matheson, W. R., & Dodd, P. W. D. (1984). Outcome expectancies as mediators for discriminative responding. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 38, 196–217.
Hull, C. L. (1952). A behavior system: An introduction to behavior theory concerning the individual organism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Kelly, R., & Grant, D. S. (2001). A differential outcomes effect using biologically neutral outcomes in delayed matching-to-sample with pigeons. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54B, 69–79.
Kruse, J. M., & Overmier, J. B. (1982). Anticipation of reward omission as a cue for choice behavior. Learning & Motivation, 13, 505–525.
Lieberman, D. A., Davidson, F. H., & Thomas, G. V. (1985). Marking in pigeons: The role of memory in delayed reinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 611–624.
Maki, P., Overmier, J. B., Delos, S., & Gutmann, A. J. (1995). Expectancies as factors influencing conditional discrimination performance of children. Psychological Record, 45, 45–71.
Peterson, G. B. (1984). How expectancies guide behavior. In H. L. Roitblat, T. G. Bever, & H. S. Terrace (Eds.), Animal cognition (pp. 135–148). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Peterson, G. B., & Trapold, M. A. (1980). Effects of altering outcome expectancies on pigeons’ delayed conditional discrimination performance. Learning & Motivation, 11, 267–288.
Sherburne, L. M., & Zentall, T. R. (1995). Pigeons transfer between conditional discriminations with differential outcomes in the absence of differential-sample-responding cues. Learning & Behavior, 23, 273–279.
Tinklepaugh, O. L. (1928). An experimental study of representative factors in monkeys. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 8, 197–236.
Trapold, M. A. (1970). Are expectancies based upon different positive reinforcing events discriminably different? Learning & Motivation, 1, 129–140.
Williams, B. A. (1994). Conditioned reinforcement: Neglected or outmoded explanatory construct? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 457–475.
Williams, D. A., Butler, M. M., & Overmier, J. B. (1990). Expectancies of reinforcer location and quality as cues for a conditional discrimination in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 16, 3–13.
Zentall, T. R., & Sherburne, L. M. (1994). Role of differential sample responding in the differential outcomes effect involving delayed matching by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 20, 390–401.
Zentall, T. R., Sherburne, L. M., & Steirn, J. N. (1992). Development of excitatory backward associations during the establishment of forward associations in a delayed conditional discrimination by pigeons. Learning & Behavior, 20, 199–206.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant 63726.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Miller, H.C., Friedrich, A.M., Narkavic, R.J. et al. Differential-outcomes effect using hedonically nondifferential outcomes with delayed matching to sample by pigeons. Learning & Behavior 37, 161–166 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/LB.37.2.161
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/LB.37.2.161