» Articles » PMID: 16811661

Associative Factors Underlying the Pigeon's Key Pecking in Auto-shaping Procedures

Overview
Date 1973 Mar 1
PMID 16811661
Citations 41
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Key pecking in pigeons can be engendered by associating response-independent food presentations with illumination of a key. Specific pairings of key and food are not necessary for this phenomenon. Differential positive association between key and food (defined in terms of relative densities of reinforcement), however, is necessary and sufficient to produce and maintain key pecking. Thus, the occurrence of key pecking in auto-shaping can be considered to depend on associative processes similar to classical conditioning. Consequently, auto-shaped pecking can be virtually eliminated by the addition of food presentations in the intertrial interval, thus removing the association between key and food. Initial exposure to random reinforcement, or reinforcement only in the absence of the key, results in lower rates of pecking in subsequent auto-shaping procedures.

Citing Articles

Translations in Stimulus-Stimulus Pairing: Autoshaping of Learner Vocalizations.

da Silva S, Williams A Perspect Behav Sci. 2020; 43(1):57-103.

PMID: 32440645 PMC: 7198677. DOI: 10.1007/s40614-019-00228-9.


On the nature of directed behavior to drug-associated light cues in rhesus monkeys ().

Reilly M, Berndt S, Woods J Behav Anal (Wash D C). 2017; 16(4):200-209.

PMID: 28584876 PMC: 5455998. DOI: 10.1037/bar0000050.


The habenula governs the attribution of incentive salience to reward predictive cues.

Danna C, Shepard P, Elmer G Front Hum Neurosci. 2013; 7:781.

PMID: 24368898 PMC: 3856853. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00781.


Disruption of conditioned reward association by typical and atypical antipsychotics.

Danna C, Elmer G Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2010; 96(1):40-7.

PMID: 20416333 PMC: 3752986. DOI: 10.1016/j.pbb.2010.04.004.


Stimulus-food pairings produce stimulus-directed touch-screen responding in cynomolgus monkeys (macaca fascicularis) with or without a positive response contingency.

Bullock C, Myers T J Exp Anal Behav. 2010; 92(1):41-55.

PMID: 20119521 PMC: 2707138. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2009.92-41.


References
1.
Sidman M, Fletcher F . A demonstration of auto-shaping with monkeys. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968; 11(3):307-9. PMC: 1338490. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-307. View

2.
Rescorla R . Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychol Rev. 1967; 74(1):71-80. DOI: 10.1037/h0024109. View

3.
Gamzu E, Williams D . Classical conditioning of a complex skeletal response. Science. 1971; 171(3974):923-5. DOI: 10.1126/science.171.3974.923. View

4.
Rescorla R . Probability of shock in the presence and absence of CS in fear conditioning. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1968; 66(1):1-5. DOI: 10.1037/h0025984. View

5.
Egger M, MILLER N . Secondary reinforcement in rats as a function of information value and reliability of the stimulus. J Exp Psychol. 1962; 64:97-104. DOI: 10.1037/h0040364. View