Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1981 Jul;36(1):51–60. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.36-51

Stimulus control of respondent and operant key pecking: A single key procedure

Henry Marcucella
PMCID: PMC1333052  PMID: 16812231

Abstract

Pigeons' responses to a uniformly illuminated response key were either reinforced on a variable-interval one-minute schedule of reinforcement or extinguished for one-minute periods. When 1.5 second signals were presented at the beginning of each component, so as to differentially predict reinforcement, the pigeons pecked at the signals, at rates higher than rates during the remainder of the component. When the brief signals were not differentially predictive of reinforcement, pecking in their presence decreased to near zero levels. Similar results were obtained with signals based upon colors and upon line orientations. Changes in rates of (unreinforced) pecking occurred during the signal whether pigeons responded differentially during the remainder of the component or not. Experiment II demonstrated that the presence of the signal correlated with extinction was not necessary for pecking to develop at the signal which preceded the component in which responding was intermittently reinforced. The experiments demonstrated a clear dissociation of respondent control from operant control of a response. In addition, operant behavior was shown to be relatively insensitive to differing rates of reinforcement, as compared to the sensitivity of respondent behavior to differing rates of reinforcement produced by the very same operant behavior.

Keywords: elicited and operant responding, stimulus control, trace stimuli, mixed schedules, key peck, pigeons

Full text

PDF
51

Selected References

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

  1. Carter D. E., Eckerman D. A. Symbolic matching by pigeons: rate of learning complex discriminations predicted from simple discriminations. Science. 1975 Feb 21;187(4177):662–664. doi: 10.1126/science.1114318. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Catania A. C., Reynolds G. S. A quantitative analysis of the responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 May;11(3 Suppl):327–383. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-s327. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Gamzu E. R., Williams D. R. Associative factors underlying the pigeon's key pecking in auto-shaping procedures. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Mar;19(2):225–232. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gamzu E., Schwartz B. The maintenance of key pecking by stimulus-contingent and response-independent food presentation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Jan;19(1):65–72. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gamzu E., Williams D. R. Classical conditioning of a complex skeletal response. Science. 1971 Mar 5;171(3974):923–925. doi: 10.1126/science.171.3974.923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Keller K. The role of elicited responding in behavioral contrast. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Mar;21(2):249–257. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Rescorla R. A. Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychol Rev. 1967 Jan;74(1):71–80. doi: 10.1037/h0024109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Rescorla R. A. Probability of shock in the presence and absence of CS in fear conditioning. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1968 Aug;66(1):1–5. doi: 10.1037/h0025984. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Ricci J. A. Key pecking under response-independent food presentation after long simple and compound stimuli. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 May;19(3):509–516. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-509. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Schwartz B. Discriminative stimulus location as a determinant of positive and negative behavioral contrast in the pigeon. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Mar;23(2):167–176. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.23-167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Schwartz B., Hamilton B., Silberberg A. Behavioral contrast in the pigeon: a study of the duration of key pecking maintained on multiple schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Sep;24(2):199–206. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.24-199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Schwartz B. Maintenance of key pecking by response-independent food presentation: the role of the modality of the signal for food. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Jul;20(1):17–22. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Spealman R. D. Interactions in multiple schedules: the role of the stimulus-reinforcer contingency. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Jul;26(1):79–93. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. TERRACE H. S. Discrimination learning with and without "errors". J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Jan;6:1–27. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Wessells M. G. Errorless discrimination, autoshaping, and conditioned inhibition. Science. 1973 Nov 30;182(4115):941–943. doi: 10.1126/science.182.4115.941. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Wilkie D. M., Ramer D. G. Errorless discrimination established by differential autoshaping. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Sep;22(2):333–340. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-333. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Williams D. R., Williams H. Auto-maintenance in the pigeon: sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Jul;12(4):511–520. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-511. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES