The Psychological Record

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 61–73 | Cite as

Hue Matching and Hue Oddity in Pigeons: Is Explicit Training Not to Peck Incorrect Hue Combinations a Sufficient Condition for Transfer?

  • Angelo Santi
Article
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained in a two-key higher-order conditional discrimination paradigm in which white lines tilted 0° or 90° were superimposed on colored backgrounds to signal matching or oddity contingencies. When the red and green training hues were replaced by blue and yellow during transfer, there was no transfer of appropriate responding to novel hues. In Experiment 2, pigeons were trained in a simple two-key matching-to-sample paradigm with red and green hues. A series of nine transfer tests was conducted in which either one or two novel hues were substituted for either one or both of the original training hues. The results of the transfer tests failed to provide strong evidence for concept learning and suggest that explicit training not to peck incorrect comparisons is not a sufficient condition for successful transfer of hue matching and oddity in pigeons.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BERRYMAN, R., CUMMING, W.W., COHEN, L.R., & JOHNSON, D.F. 1965. Acquisition and transfer of simultaneous oddity. Psychological Reports, 17, 767–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. CARTER, D.E., & ECKERMAN, D.A. 1975. Symbolic matching by pigeons: Rate of learning complex discriminations predicted from simple discriminations. Science, 187, 662–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. CARTER, D.E., & ECKERMAN, D.A. 1976. Reply to Zentall and Hogan. Science, 191, 409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. CARTER, D.E., & WERNER, T.J. 1978. Complex learning and information processing by pigeons: A critical analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 565–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. CUMMING, W.W., & BERRYMAN, R. 1961. Some data on matching behavior in the pigeon. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 281–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. FARTHING, G.W., & OPUDA, M.J. 1974. Transfer of matching-to-sample in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. PREMACK, D. 1978. On the abstractness of human concepts: Why it would be difficult to talk to a pigeon. In S.H. Hulse, H. Fowler, & W.K. Honig (Eds.), Cognitive processes in animal behavior. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. SANTI, A. 1978. The role of physical identity of the sample and correct comparison stimulus in matching-to-sample paradigms. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 511–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. URCUIOLI, P.J. 1977. Transfer of oddity-from-sample performance in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental A nalysis of Behavior, 27, 195–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. URCUIOLI, P.J., & NEVIN, J.A. 1975. Transfer of hue matching in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 24, 149–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. ZENTALL, T.R., & HOGAN, D.E., 1974. Abstract concept learning in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 102, 393–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ZENTALL, T.R., & HOGAN, D.E. 1975. Concept learning in the pigeon: Transfer to new matching and nonmatching stimuli. American Journal of Psychology, 88, 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ZENTALL, T.R., & HOGAN, D.E. 1976. Pigeons can learn identity or difference or both. Science, 191, 408–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Angelo Santi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWilfrid Laurier UniversityWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations