» Articles » PMID: 34236081

Design and Evaluation of a Touchscreen Apparatus for Operant Research with Pigeons

Overview
Date 2021 Jul 8
PMID 34236081
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We developed a touchscreen apparatus for pigeons and conducted a series of experiments that assessed its utility for free-operant procedures. The apparatus incorporated an on-board Windows computer, an electromechanical interface, an amplified speaker, and the touchscreen. We found that merely projecting a virtual key on the screen was insufficient; too many pecks missed the key. Adding a visual target in the center of the key and providing visual feedback for on-key pecks both failed to improve response accuracy. Accuracy was improved by imposing a timeout after off-key pecks or providing a physical boundary around the key. With the physical boundary, response accuracy was comparable to that obtained with conventional plastic keys, and response acquisition via autoshaping also was comparable. Mixing the color elements of the screen's pixels produced color stimuli, but the colors did not function as pure wavelengths of light in tests of stimulus generalization. Both colors and geometric shapes functioned as discriminative stimuli in multiple schedules with variable-interval and extinction components or rich and lean fixed-ratio components. In general, our touchscreen apparatus is a viable alternative to conventional pigeon chambers and increases the experimenter's options for visual stimuli, auditory stimuli, and the number and location of response keys.

Citing Articles

Rich-lean transitions produced by stimuli associated with accurate and inaccurate responding by pigeons.

Toegel F, Toegel C, Yahrmarkt C, Perone M Behav Processes. 2023; 207:104858.

PMID: 36934796 PMC: 10073323. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2023.104858.

References
1.
Kono M . Applicability to foraging simulation of a reinforcement schedule controlling the response energy of pigeons. Learn Behav. 2013; 41(4):425-32. PMC: 3840284. DOI: 10.3758/s13420-013-0117-7. View

2.
Stahlman W, Blaisdell A . The Modulation of Operant Variation by the Probability, Magnitude, and Delay of Reinforcement. Learn Motiv. 2011; 42(3):221-236. PMC: 3128391. DOI: 10.1016/j.lmot.2011.05.001. View

3.
Kono M . The effects of fixed-interval schedules on variability of pigeons' pecking location. J Exp Anal Behav. 2017; 108(2):290-304. DOI: 10.1002/jeab.276. View

4.
Tan L, Hackenberg T . Pigeons' demand and preference for specific and generalized conditioned reinforcers in a token economy. J Exp Anal Behav. 2015; 104(3):296-314. DOI: 10.1002/jeab.181. View

5.
Levenson R, Krupinski E, Navarro V, Wasserman E . Pigeons (Columba livia) as Trainable Observers of Pathology and Radiology Breast Cancer Images. PLoS One. 2015; 10(11):e0141357. PMC: 4651348. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0141357. View