Choosing among natural stimuli.

Pigeons worked on concurrent variable-interval, variable-interval schedules with the alternatives signaled by slides either containing trees or not. The schedules were designed to hold both overall and relative rates of reinforcement within narrowly constrained limits, and slides were quasi-randomly ordered each day. Responding to the two alternatives was well described by the generalized matching equation with substantial undermatching. Using an adaptation of the matching law, we estimated that the subjects were correctly classifying 82% to 95% of exemplars. The matching performance transferred to new exemplars of trees and nontrees with only slight generalization decrement. The pigeons appeared to be discriminating among exemplars even when the alternatives provided equal rates of reinforcement and the average relative performances were close to 50%.

[1]  J D Findley,et al.  Preference and Switching under Concurrent Scheduling. , 1958, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[2]  K. White,et al.  Stimulus and reinforcer relativity in multiple schedules: Local and dimensional effects on sensitivity to reinforcement. , 1984, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[3]  J. Wearden,et al.  Superimposition of response-independent reinforcement. , 1986, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[4]  R. Herrnstein,et al.  Natural concepts in pigeons. , 1976, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[5]  M C Davison,et al.  The relation between the generalized matching law and signal-detection theory. , 1978, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[6]  R J Herrnstein,et al.  Acquisition, generalization, and discrimination reversal of a natural concept. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[7]  W M Baum,et al.  On two types of deviation from the matching law: bias and undermatching. , 1974, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[8]  S R Hursh,et al.  The economics of daily consumption controlling food- and water-reinforced responding. , 1978, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[9]  G M Heyman,et al.  Is matching compatible with reinforcement maximization on concurrent variable interval variable ratio? , 1979, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[10]  R. Herrnstein,et al.  CHAPTER 5 – Melioration and Behavioral Allocation1 , 1980 .

[11]  I. DENNIS,et al.  New Problem in Concept Formation , 1973, Nature.

[12]  R. Herrnstein,et al.  Complex Visual Concept in the Pigeon , 1964, Science.

[13]  D. Stubbs,et al.  Concurrent responding with fixed relative rate of reinforcement. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[14]  R. J. Herrnstein,et al.  Riddles of natural categorization , 1985 .