Nallan G B, Pace G M, McCoy D F, Zentall T R
Am J Psychol. 1979 Dec;92(4):703-10.
Trial duration and intertrial interval duration were parametrically varied between groups of pigeons exposed to a discrimination involving the presence vs. the absence of a dot. Half the groups received the dot as the positive stimulus (feature positive groups) and half the groups received the dot as the negative stimulus (feature negative groups). Faster learning by the feature positive birds (feature positive effect) was found when the trial duration was short (5 sec) regardless of whether the intertrial interval was short (5 sec) or long (30 sec). No evidence for a feature positive effect was found when the trial duration was long (30 sec) regardless of the length of the intertrial interval (30 sec or 180 sec). The results suggest that short trial duration is a necessary condition for the occurrence of the feature positive effect, and neither intertrial interval nor trial duration/intertrial interval ratio are important for its occurrence. The suggestion that mechanisms underlying the feature positive effect and autoshaping might be similar was not supported by the present experiment since the trial duration/intertrial interval ration parameter appears to play an important role in autoshaping but not the feature positive effect.
在一组鸽子中,对涉及有圆点与无圆点的辨别实验,试验持续时间和试验间隔时间进行了参数变化。一半的组将圆点作为正性刺激(特征正性组),另一半的组将圆点作为负性刺激(特征负性组)。当试验持续时间较短(5秒)时,无论试验间隔是短(5秒)还是长(30秒),特征正性组的鸽子学习速度更快(特征正性效应)。当试验持续时间较长(30秒)时,无论试验间隔的长度如何(30秒或180秒),均未发现特征正性效应的证据。结果表明,短试验持续时间是特征正性效应发生的必要条件,试验间隔和试验持续时间/试验间隔比率对其发生并不重要。本实验不支持特征正性效应和自动形成的潜在机制可能相似的观点,因为试验持续时间/试验间隔比率参数似乎在自动形成中起重要作用,但对特征正性效应不起作用。