Limits...
Attributional and relational processing in pigeons.

Garlick D, Gant DJ, Brakel LA, Blaisdell AP - Front Psychol (2011)

Bottom Line: A strong preference was found for the attribute of color.The discrimination was not found to transfer to novel colors, however, suggesting that a general color rule had not been learned.Further, when color could not be used to guide responding, some influence of other attributional cues such as shape, but not relational cues, was found.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, CA, USA.

ABSTRACT
Six pigeons were trained using a matching-to-sample procedure where sample and rewarded comparisons matched on both attributional (color) and relational (horizontal or vertical orientation) dimensions. Probes then evaluated the pigeons' preference to comparisons that varied in these dimensions. A strong preference was found for the attribute of color. The discrimination was not found to transfer to novel colors, however, suggesting that a general color rule had not been learned. Further, when color could not be used to guide responding, some influence of other attributional cues such as shape, but not relational cues, was found. We conclude that pigeons based their performance on attributional properties of but not on relational properties between elements in our matching-to-sample procedure. Future studies should look at examining other attributes to compare attributional versus relational processing.

No MeSH data available.


Examples of stimulus displays presented to the pigeons. (A) An example of a training display used in Experiment 1. The circular stimulus at the top of the panel served as a sample; the pair of bars at the bottom of (A) show the rewarded comparison stimulus on the left (an attributional and relational match to the sample) and non-rewarded comparison on the right (non-matching to the sample in both attributional and relational levels). (B) An example of a test display from Experiment 1. The comparison on the left was an attributional match to the sample, the comparison on the right was a relational match to the sample. (C) Example of a test display from Experiment 2. Both comparisons were an attributional match to the sample, but only the left-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. (D) Example of a test display from Experiment 3. Neither comparison was an attributional match to the sample; but only the left-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. (E) Example of a test display from Experiment 4. Both comparisons were an attributional match to the sample, but only the right-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. The orientations of the bars in the left-hand comparison were oriented in the same overall shape as the colored halves of the sample stimulus. (F) Example of a test display from Experiment 5. The comparison on the left was an attributional match, while the comparison on the right was a relational match on probe tests involving novel color elements.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3111252&req=5

Figure 2: Examples of stimulus displays presented to the pigeons. (A) An example of a training display used in Experiment 1. The circular stimulus at the top of the panel served as a sample; the pair of bars at the bottom of (A) show the rewarded comparison stimulus on the left (an attributional and relational match to the sample) and non-rewarded comparison on the right (non-matching to the sample in both attributional and relational levels). (B) An example of a test display from Experiment 1. The comparison on the left was an attributional match to the sample, the comparison on the right was a relational match to the sample. (C) Example of a test display from Experiment 2. Both comparisons were an attributional match to the sample, but only the left-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. (D) Example of a test display from Experiment 3. Neither comparison was an attributional match to the sample; but only the left-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. (E) Example of a test display from Experiment 4. Both comparisons were an attributional match to the sample, but only the right-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. The orientations of the bars in the left-hand comparison were oriented in the same overall shape as the colored halves of the sample stimulus. (F) Example of a test display from Experiment 5. The comparison on the left was an attributional match, while the comparison on the right was a relational match on probe tests involving novel color elements.

Mentions: Pigeons were trained on the procedure shown in Figure 2A. Each trial began with the presentation of a sample stimulus consisting of a circle divided into two equal halves. Each half was a different color, such as red/green. All 12 combinations of the colors red, green, blue, and yellow were used. On half the trials the circle halves were arranged horizontally (left/right) of each other, and on the remaining trials they were in a vertical (top/bottom) arrangement. After pecking a number of times at the circle, two pairs of bars were presented below the sample, one on either side of the screen. These served as the comparison stimuli. One comparison was the same combination of colors as the sample and was placed in the same arrangement (right/left or top/bottom) as was the sample. The other comparison consisted of bars that were different color and arrangement than the sample. Pecks to the matching comparison were reinforced, while pecks to the non-matching comparison terminated the trial without reinforcement.


Attributional and relational processing in pigeons.

Garlick D, Gant DJ, Brakel LA, Blaisdell AP - Front Psychol (2011)

Examples of stimulus displays presented to the pigeons. (A) An example of a training display used in Experiment 1. The circular stimulus at the top of the panel served as a sample; the pair of bars at the bottom of (A) show the rewarded comparison stimulus on the left (an attributional and relational match to the sample) and non-rewarded comparison on the right (non-matching to the sample in both attributional and relational levels). (B) An example of a test display from Experiment 1. The comparison on the left was an attributional match to the sample, the comparison on the right was a relational match to the sample. (C) Example of a test display from Experiment 2. Both comparisons were an attributional match to the sample, but only the left-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. (D) Example of a test display from Experiment 3. Neither comparison was an attributional match to the sample; but only the left-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. (E) Example of a test display from Experiment 4. Both comparisons were an attributional match to the sample, but only the right-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. The orientations of the bars in the left-hand comparison were oriented in the same overall shape as the colored halves of the sample stimulus. (F) Example of a test display from Experiment 5. The comparison on the left was an attributional match, while the comparison on the right was a relational match on probe tests involving novel color elements.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3111252&req=5

Figure 2: Examples of stimulus displays presented to the pigeons. (A) An example of a training display used in Experiment 1. The circular stimulus at the top of the panel served as a sample; the pair of bars at the bottom of (A) show the rewarded comparison stimulus on the left (an attributional and relational match to the sample) and non-rewarded comparison on the right (non-matching to the sample in both attributional and relational levels). (B) An example of a test display from Experiment 1. The comparison on the left was an attributional match to the sample, the comparison on the right was a relational match to the sample. (C) Example of a test display from Experiment 2. Both comparisons were an attributional match to the sample, but only the left-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. (D) Example of a test display from Experiment 3. Neither comparison was an attributional match to the sample; but only the left-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. (E) Example of a test display from Experiment 4. Both comparisons were an attributional match to the sample, but only the right-hand comparison was a relational match to the sample. The orientations of the bars in the left-hand comparison were oriented in the same overall shape as the colored halves of the sample stimulus. (F) Example of a test display from Experiment 5. The comparison on the left was an attributional match, while the comparison on the right was a relational match on probe tests involving novel color elements.
Mentions: Pigeons were trained on the procedure shown in Figure 2A. Each trial began with the presentation of a sample stimulus consisting of a circle divided into two equal halves. Each half was a different color, such as red/green. All 12 combinations of the colors red, green, blue, and yellow were used. On half the trials the circle halves were arranged horizontally (left/right) of each other, and on the remaining trials they were in a vertical (top/bottom) arrangement. After pecking a number of times at the circle, two pairs of bars were presented below the sample, one on either side of the screen. These served as the comparison stimuli. One comparison was the same combination of colors as the sample and was placed in the same arrangement (right/left or top/bottom) as was the sample. The other comparison consisted of bars that were different color and arrangement than the sample. Pecks to the matching comparison were reinforced, while pecks to the non-matching comparison terminated the trial without reinforcement.

Bottom Line: A strong preference was found for the attribute of color.The discrimination was not found to transfer to novel colors, however, suggesting that a general color rule had not been learned.Further, when color could not be used to guide responding, some influence of other attributional cues such as shape, but not relational cues, was found.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of California Los Angeles, CA, USA.

ABSTRACT
Six pigeons were trained using a matching-to-sample procedure where sample and rewarded comparisons matched on both attributional (color) and relational (horizontal or vertical orientation) dimensions. Probes then evaluated the pigeons' preference to comparisons that varied in these dimensions. A strong preference was found for the attribute of color. The discrimination was not found to transfer to novel colors, however, suggesting that a general color rule had not been learned. Further, when color could not be used to guide responding, some influence of other attributional cues such as shape, but not relational cues, was found. We conclude that pigeons based their performance on attributional properties of but not on relational properties between elements in our matching-to-sample procedure. Future studies should look at examining other attributes to compare attributional versus relational processing.

No MeSH data available.