Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1976 Sep;26(2):237–256. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-237

A comparison of the key-peck and treadle-press operants in the pigeon: differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule of reinforcement1

W Kirk Richardson, David B Clark
PMCID: PMC1333511  PMID: 16811945

Abstract

Key pecking and treadle pressing in pigeons were compared under concurrent (key-treadle) and single-operant differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedules of food reinforcement ranging from 5 to 60 sec (concurrent procedure) or 5 to 120 sec (single-operant procedure). Under both procedures, the two operants followed the same general law: decreasing response rate and reinforcement rate and increasing number of responses per reinforcement as a function of increasing schedule interval. High correlations were found between key pecking and treadle pressing for the measures of response rate, reinforcement rate, and responses per reinforcement. Regression equations allowed the prediction of treadle pressing from key pecking. More bursting occurred in responding to the key, and key pecking showed a more precise temporal discrimination than treadle pressing. A test for sequential dependencies between key and treadle responses showed significant dependencies not only under the concurrent procedure but also in data created artificially by merging key and treadle sequences from different pigeons under the concurrent procedure and from the same pigeon under the single-operant procedure. It seems likely that the sequential dependencies found were due to the independent action of the schedule on each operant and that behavioral dependencies did not occur with the concurrent training procedure. The key-peck operant does not appear to have any special qualities that preclude its use in discovering general laws of behavior, at least under the differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule. The usefulness of the key peck in other situations requires direct experimental study.

Keywords: differential reinforcement of low rate, concurrent schedules, spaced responding, IRT distributions, treadle pressing, key pecking, pigeons

Full text

PDF
237

Selected References

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

  1. ANGER D. The dependence of interresponse times upon the relative reinforcement of different interresponse times. J Exp Psychol. 1956 Sep;52(3):145–161. doi: 10.1037/h0041255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ayres J. J., Benedict J. O., Glackenmeyer R., Matthews W. Some factors involved in the comparison of response systems: acquisition, extinction, and transfer of head-poke and lever-press Sidman avoidance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Sep;22(2):371–379. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-371. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. 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]
  4. Foree D. D., Lolordo V. M. Signalled and unsignalled free-operant avoidance in the pigeon. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 May;13(3):283–290. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-283. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hemmes N. S. Behavioral contrast in pigeons depends upon the operant. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1973 Oct;85(1):171–178. doi: 10.1037/h0034883. [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. Klein M., Rilling M. Effects of response-shock interval and shock intensity on free-operant avoidance responding in the pigeon. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Sep;18(2):295–303. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.18-295. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. McSweeney F. K. Matching and contrast on several concurrent treadle-press schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Mar;23(2):193–198. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.23-193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Richardson W. K., Loughead T. E. Behavior under large values of the differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jul;22(1):121–129. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. 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]
  11. Scull J., Westbrook R. F. Interactions in multiple schedules with different responses in each of the components. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Nov;20(3):511–519. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-511. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Smith R. F., Keller F. R. Free-operant avoidance in the pigeon using a treadle response. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Mar;13(2):211–214. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-211. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Westbrook R. F. Failure to obtain positive contrast when pigeons press a bar. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Nov;20(3):499–510. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-499. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. 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