Abstract
In each of two experiments, different groups of pigeons were required to discriminate between one of two basic kinds of stimulus differences: stimulus quality or stimulus location. For stimulus-quality groups, a key was illuminated by one of two colors on trials ending with food delivery and by the other color on trials ending with no food. For stimulus-location groups, a key was illuminated at one of two locations on trials ending with food delivery and at the other location on trials ending with no food. The birds began to respond differentially to the stimuli (i.e., peck the keys on food trials and not peck the keys on no-food trials) earlier in acquisiton if the stimulus qualities served as the signals for trial outcomes than if the stimulus locations served as those signals. The results from both experiments are consistent with predictions from a hypothesis regarding interactions among the qualities and locations of stimuli and responses (the “quality-location hypothesis”). Furthermore, the present results support other recent demonstrations of the important role that spatial relations among stimuli can play in classical conditioning.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bowe, C. A. (1984). Spatial relations in animal learning and behavior.Psychological Record,34, 181–209.
Bowe, C. A., Miller, J. D., & Green, L. (1984).Qualities and locations of stimuli and responses affecting discrimination learning of pigeons. Unpublished manuscript.
Bowe, C. A., Miller, J. D., &Green, L. (1987). Qualities and locations of stimuli and responses affecting discrimination learning of chinchillas (Chinchilla laniger) and pigeons (Columba livid).Journal of Comparative Psychology,101, 132–138.
Hearst, E. (1978). Stimulus relationships and feature selection in learning and behavior. In S. Hulse, H. Fowler, & W. K. Honig (Eds.),Cognitive processes in animal behavior (pp. 51–88). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hearst, E., &Jenkins, H. M. (1974).Sign-tracking: The stimulus-reinforcer relation in directed action. Austin, TX: Psychonomic Society.
Lawicka, W. (1964). The role of stimulus modality in successive discrimination and differentiation learning.Bulletin of the Academy of Polish Sciences,13, 35–38.
Lawicka, W. (1969). Differing effectiveness of auditory quality and location cues in two forms of differentiation learning.Acta Biologiae Expenmentahs,29, 83–92.
Marshall, B. S., Gokey, D. S., Green, P. L., &Rashotte, M. E. (1979). Spatial location of first- and second-order visual conditioned stimuli in second-order conditioning of the pigeon’s keypeck.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,13, 133–136.
Miller, J. D., &Bowe, C. A. (1982). Roles of the qualities and locations of stimuli and responses in simple associative learning: The quality-location hypothesis.Pavlovian Journal of Biological Science,17, 129–139.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927)Conditioned reflexes Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rescorla, R. A., &Cunningham, C. L. (1979). Spatial contiguity facilitates Pavlovian second-order conditioning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,5, 152–161.
Schwartz, B. (1974). On going back to nature: A review of Seligman & Hager’sBiological boundaries of learning.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,21, 183–198.
Szwejkowska, G. (1967). Qualitative versus directional cues in differential conditioning: III. The role of qualitative and directional cues in differentiation of salivary conditioned reflexes.Acta Biologiae Experimental,27, 413–420.
Testa, T. J. (1975) Effects of similarity of location and temporal intensity pattern of conditioned and unconditioned stimuli on the acquisition of conditioned suppression in rats.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,1, 114–121.
Wagner, A. R. (1969). Incidental stimuli and discrimination learning. In R. M. Gilbert & N. S. Sutherland (Eds.),Animal discrimination learning (pp. 83–111). London: Academic Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Preparation of this paper was supported by Program Project Grant NS 03856 from the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke to Central Institute for the Deaf.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bowe, C.A., Green, L. & Miller, J.D. Differential acquisition of discriminated autoshaping as a function of stimulus qualities and locations. Animal Learning & Behavior 15, 285–292 (1987). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205021
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205021