Weiss S J, Weissman R D
The American University.
J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Mar;57(2):127-43. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-127.
Pigeons acquired discriminated key pecking between 528- and 540-nm stimuli by either a response-reinforcer (operant group) or a stimulus-reinforcer (autoshaped group) contingency, with other training-schedule parameters comparable over groups. For the birds in the operant group, key pecks intermittently produced grain in the presence of one hue on the key (positive stimulus) but not in the other (negative stimulus). For the birds in the autoshaped group, pecking emerged when grain was intermittently presented independently of key pecking during one key color but was not presented during the other key color. Two independent contingency assays, peck-location comparisons and elimination of differences in reinforcement rate, confirmed the effectiveness of the two training procedures in establishing operant or respondent control of key pecking. After reaching a 10:1, or better, discrimination ratio between key pecks during the two key colors, the birds received a wavelength generalization test. Criterion baseline key-peck rates were comparable for operant and autoshaped groups prior to testing. On the generalization test, performed in extinction, all birds pecked most at a stimulus removed from the positive training stimulus in the direction away from the negative stimulus. In testing, autoshaped "peak" rates (24.5 to 64.9 pecks per minute) were from 33% to 80% higher than rates in the presence of the training stimuli. Respondent peak shift rarely has been reported heretofore, and never this consistently and robustly. These results further confirm the similarity of perceptual processing in classical and operant learning. They are discussed in terms of Spence's gradient-interaction theory and Weiss' (1978) two-process model of stimulus control.
鸽子通过反应-强化物(操作组)或刺激-强化物(自动塑造组)的应急方式,在528纳米和540纳米的刺激之间获得了辨别性按键啄击,各实验组的其他训练计划参数相当。对于操作组的鸽子,按键啄击在按键上出现一种颜色(正性刺激)时会间歇性地产生谷物,但在另一种颜色(负性刺激)时则不会。对于自动塑造组的鸽子,当谷物在一种按键颜色出现时独立于按键啄击间歇性呈现,而在另一种按键颜色时不呈现时,啄击行为就会出现。两项独立的应急分析、啄击位置比较以及强化率差异的消除,证实了这两种训练程序在建立对按键啄击的操作性或应答性控制方面的有效性。在两种按键颜色期间的按键啄击达到10:1或更好的辨别率后,鸽子接受了波长泛化测试。测试前,操作组和自动塑造组的标准基线按键啄击率相当。在消退状态下进行的泛化测试中,所有鸽子对从正性训练刺激向远离负性刺激方向移动的刺激啄击最多。在测试中,自动塑造的“峰值”率(每分钟24.5至64.9次啄击)比训练刺激出现时的率高33%至80%。此前很少有关于应答性峰值转移的报道,而且从未如此一致和强烈。这些结果进一步证实了经典学习和操作学习中知觉加工的相似性。根据斯彭斯的梯度相互作用理论和韦斯(1978年)的刺激控制双过程模型对这些结果进行了讨论。