Premium
INFORMATION ON RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS COMPARED WITH INFORMATION ON FOOD DENSITY AS A REIN FORCER OF OBSERVING IN PIGEONS
Author(s) -
Dinsmoor James A.,
Bowe Craig A.,
Green Leonard,
Hanson John
Publication year - 1988
Publication title -
journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.75
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1938-3711
pISSN - 0022-5002
DOI - 10.1901/jeab.1988.49-229
Subject(s) - pecking order , extinction (optical mineralogy) , food delivery , uncorrelated , variable (mathematics) , reinforcement , psychology , stimulus (psychology) , key (lock) , statistics , econometrics , mathematics , social psychology , computer science , cognitive psychology , ecology , biology , marketing , business , computer security , paleontology , mathematical analysis
On a variable‐interval schedule, pecking the key to the pigeon's right (observing response) produced red or green displays relating to the delivery of grain and its dependence on pecking the key to the left (food key). During various blocks of sessions, mixed (no stimulus change) schedules including the following pairs of components were temporarily converted by the observing response to their corresponding multiple (correlated stimuli) schedules: variable‐interval 60‐s, extinction; variable‐interval 60‐s, variable‐time (response‐independent) 60‐s; extinction, variable‐time 60‐s. Differences in food delivery maintained substantial rates of responding on the observing key, without regard to pecking requirements on the food key. Although stimuli correlated with differences in the response requirement on the food key maintained higher observing rates than those maintained by uncorrelated stimuli, they were much lower than those based on food. The value of predictive stimuli as reinforcers is determined by the value of the events predicted. In particular, the cost of pecking appears to be low, and this may place limitations on the applicability of energy‐based and economic models of behavior.