Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis logoLink to Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
. 2001 Summer;34(2):127–144. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2001.34-127

Correspondence as conditional stimulus control: insights from experiments with pigeons.

K A Lattal 1, K J Doepke 1
PMCID: PMC1284307  PMID: 11421307

Abstract

Correspondence between saying and doing, typically studied in young children and individuals with developmental disabilities, was examined as an instance of conditional stimulus control. In Experiment 1, 3 pigeons were exposed to a two-component repeated-trials procedure. In the first-sample or say-component, two response keys transilluminated by different colored lights were presented and the pigeon pecked one of the keys. After 1 s of darkness in the chamber, the second-choice or do-component was presented, in which the two keys again were transilluminated, one by the color selected in the first component and the second by another color. Selecting the color that matched that selected in the say component resulted in access to food. Selecting the other color produced a blackout of the chamber. After an intertrial interval (ITI), the next say component was programmed, and the procedure was repeated. Correspondence remained at chance levels through several manipulations of ITI duration and sample response requirement. When a correction procedure was added such that only the originally selected sample stimulus was re-presented until a correct choice response occurred, reliable correspondence developed in 2 pigeons. This correspondence was eliminated by making reinforcement independent of correspondence and subsequently was reestablished when reinforcement again depended on correspondence. In Experiment 2, 3 other pigeons rapidly acquired correspondence under the final procedure used in Experiment 1. Increasing the time interval between the say and do components diminished correspondence. The results of the two experiments suggest how correspondence may be considered an instance of conditional stimulus control and that it is possible to construct a homologue of human say-do correspondence with pigeons.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (188.0 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Arbuckle J. L., Lattal K. A. Changes in functional response units with briefly delayed reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Mar;49(2):249–263. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.49-249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Baer D. M., Peterson R. F., Sherman J. A. The development of imitation by reinforcing behavioral similarity to a model. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967 Sep;10(5):405–416. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Baer R. A., Blount R. L., Detrich R., Stokes T. F. Using intermittent reinforcement to program maintenance of verbal/nonverbal correspondence. J Appl Behav Anal. 1987 Summer;20(2):179–184. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1987.20-179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Baer R. A. On the functional role of the verbalization in correspondence training procedures. J Appl Behav Anal. 1988 Winter;21(4):345–356. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1988.21-345. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Baer R. A., Williams J. A., Osnes P. G., Stokes T. F. Delayed reinforcement as an indiscriminable contingency in verbal/nonverbal correspondence training. J Appl Behav Anal. 1984 Winter;17(4):429–440. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1984.17-429. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Carter D. E., Werner T. J. Complex learning and information processing by pigeons: a critical analysis. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 May;29(3):565–601. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.29-565. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Deacon J. R., Konarski E. A., Jr Correspondence training: an example of rule-governed behavior? J Appl Behav Anal. 1987 Winter;20(4):391–400. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1987.20-391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Freeman T. J., Lattal K. A. Stimulus control of behavioral history. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Jan;57(1):5–15. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Galbicka G. Shaping in the 21st century: Moving percentile schedules into applied settings. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Winter;27(4):739–760. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-739. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hayes S. C. Nonhumans have not yet shown stimulus equivalence. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 May;51(3):385–392. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.51-385. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Israel A. C., Brown M. S. Correspondence training, prior verbal training, and control of nonverbal behavior via control of verbal behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1977 Summer;10(2):333–338. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1977.10-333. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Israel A. C. Some thoughts on correspondence between saying and doing. J Appl Behav Anal. 1978 Summer;11(2):271–276. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1978.11-271. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Karlan G. R., Rusch F. R. Correspondence between saying and doing: Some thoughts on defining correspondence and future directions for application. J Appl Behav Anal. 1982 Spring;15(1):151–162. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1982.15-151. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Lattal K. A. Reinforcement contingencies as discriminative stimuli: II. Effects of changes in stimulus probability. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Jan;31(1):15–22. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.31-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Mace F. C. Basic research needed for stimulating the development of behavioral technologies. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 May;61(3):529–550. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Matthews B. A., Shimoff E., Catania A. C. Saying and doing: A contingency-space analysis. J Appl Behav Anal. 1987 Spring;20(1):69–74. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1987.20-69. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. McIntire K. D., Cleary J., Thompson T. Conditional relations by monkeys: Reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 May;47(3):279–285. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.47-279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Miller N. E. The value of behavioral research on animals. Am Psychol. 1985 Apr;40(4):423–440. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.40.4.423. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Nelson K. R., Wasserman E. A. Temporal factors influencing the pigeon's successive matching-to-sample performance: sample duration, intertrial interval, and retention interval. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Sep;30(2):153–162. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-153. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Osnes P. G., Guevremont D. C., Stokes T. F. If I say I'll talk more, then I will. Correspondence training to increase peer-directed talk by socially withdrawn children. Behav Modif. 1986 Jul;10(3):287–299. doi: 10.1177/01454455860103002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Risley T. R., Hart B. Developing correspondence between the non-verbal and verbal behavior of preschool children. J Appl Behav Anal. 1968 Winter;1(4):267–281. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1968.1-267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Rogers-Warren A., Baer D. M. Correspondence between saying and doing: teaching children to share and praise. J Appl Behav Anal. 1976 Fall;9(3):335–354. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1976.9-335. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Saunders K. J. Naming in conditional discrimination and stimulus equivalence. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 May;51(3):379–384. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.51-379. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Schwartz B. Failure to produce response variability with reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Mar;37(2):171–181. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Shimp C. P. The local organization of behavior: discrimination of and memory for simple behavioral patterns. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 Nov;36(3):303–315. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.36-303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Stark L. J., Collins F. L., Jr, Osnes P. G., Stokes T. F. Using reinforcement and cueing to increase healthy snack food choices in preschoolers. J Appl Behav Anal. 1986 Winter;19(4):367–379. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1986.19-367. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Stokes T. F., Osnes P. G. Saying and doing: A commentary on a contingency-space analysis. J Appl Behav Anal. 1987 Summer;20(2):161–164. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1987.20-161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Whitman T. L., Scibak J. W., Butler K. M., Richter R., Johnson M. R. Improving classroom behavior in mentally retarded children through correspondence training. J Appl Behav Anal. 1982 Winter;15(4):545–564. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1982.15-545. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES