Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1975 Jul;24(1):59–72. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.24-59

Some variables affecting rate of key pecking during response-independent procedures (autoshaping)1

Charles C Perkins Jr, William O Beavers, Robert A Hancock Jr, Patricia C Hemmendinger, Dennis Hemmendinger, John A Ricci
PMCID: PMC1333381  PMID: 16811864

Abstract

Rate of key pecking by pigeons subjected to response-independent procedures in which a stimulus on the response key preceded food presentation was investigated in eight experiments. Color and shape of the stimulus, duration of the stimulus, probability of food following the stimulus, duration of the intertrial interval, and duration of food presentation were varied separately and in combination. All variables studied, except color and shape of the stimulus, had a reliable effect on pecking rate, but some variables had stronger effects than others. Rapid key pecking may be obtained with a variety of response-independent procedures, as well as by response-dependent reinforcement. The results of experiments in which food is both dependent on key pecking and correlated with stimulus conditions are not representative of simple operant effects. Key pecking is an ideal response for studying the simultaneous operation of response-reinforcer and stimulus-reinforcer effects.

Full text

PDF
59

Selected References

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

  1. Brown P. L., Jenkins H. M. Auto-shaping of the pigeon's key-peck. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jan;11(1):1–8. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Fernie R. W. A device for measuring food-magazine behavior in the pigeon. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Nov;16(3):409–410. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.16-409. [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., 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]
  5. MYERS J. L. The effects of delay of reinforcement upon an operant discrimination in the pigeon. J Exp Psychol. 1958 Apr;55(4):363–368. doi: 10.1037/h0047636. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Redford M. E., Perkins C. C. The role of autopecking in behavioral contrast. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jan;21(1):145–150. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. 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]
  8. Schwartz B., Williams D. R. Two different kinds of key peck in the pigeon: some properties of responses maintained by negative and positive response-reinforcer contingencies. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Sep;18(2):201–216. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.18-201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. THOMAS D. R., CARONITE S. C. STIMULUS GENERALIZATION OF A POSITIVE CONDITIONED REINFORCER. II. EFFECTS OF DISCRIMINATION TRAINING. J Exp Psychol. 1964 Oct;68:402–406. doi: 10.1037/h0043091. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. 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