Abstract
Although shaping is a widely accepted operant-conditioning procedure for establishing new responses, technological problems involved in specifying and recording precise approximations to the target response have hindered experimental analysis of the shaping process. The present study used a computer-controlled system that allows relatively precise procedural specification by continuous tracking of a pigeon's head and reinforcing successively closer approximations to contact of the head with an arbitrary fixed spherical region of 3-cm diameter. The procedure was demonstrated to be effective, in that shaping of the target response occurred rapidly for each of the 3 birds in the study.
Keywords: shaping, successive approximations, reinforcement, operant behavior, automated technology, key peck, pigeons
Full text
PDF
Images in this article
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- 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]
- Eckerman D. A., Hienz R. D., Stern S., Kowlowitz V. Shaping the location of a pigeon's peck: effect of rate and size of shaping steps. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 May;33(3):299–310. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- Jenkins H. M., Moore B. R. The form of the auto-shaped response with food or water reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Sep;20(2):163–181. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kuch D. O. Differentiation of press durations with upper and lower limits on reinforced values. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Sep;22(2):275–283. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-275. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pear J. J., Eldridge G. D. The operant-respondent distinction: Future directions. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Nov;42(3):453–467. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pear J. J. Spatiotemporal patterns of behavior produced by variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Sep;44(2):217–231. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.44-217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Platt J. R. Interresponse-time shaping by variable-interval-like interresponse-time reinforcement contingencies. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Jan;31(1):3–14. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.31-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Seligman M. E., Maier S. F. Failure to escape traumatic shock. J Exp Psychol. 1967 May;74(1):1–9. doi: 10.1037/h0024514. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]