Do pigeons prefer information in the absence of differential reinforcement?
Do pigeons prefer information in the absence of differential reinforcement?
复制标题
DOI：
10.3758/s13420-012-0067-5
复制
发表时间：
2012-12
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
Stagner JP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Zentall TR;Stagner JP
先前的研究表明，鸽子不喜欢提供样本（用于样本匹配）的替代方案，而不喜欢不提供样本的替代方案（即，没有迹象表明哪种比较刺激是正确的）。然而，研究表明，当强化延迟受到控制时，鸽子对匹配有强烈的偏好，而不是伪匹配（有一个样本，但它没有表明哪个比较刺激是正确的）。本研究的实验1复制并扩展了Zentall和Stagner的研究结果，在匹配和伪匹配任务中都包含了样本与其中一个比较刺激之间的同一性关系。在实验2中，当我们问如果我们将这两个任务的强化概率等同于匹配时，鸽子是否仍然更喜欢匹配时，我们发现匹配对伪匹配没有系统的偏好。因此，在缺乏差异强化的情况下，样本所提供的表明两种比较刺激中哪一种是正确的信息不足以产生对该选择的偏好。
Prior research indicates that pigeons do not prefer an alternative that provides a sample (for matching-to-sample) over an alternative that does not provide a sample (i.e., there is no indication of which comparison stimulus is correct). However, showed that when delay of reinforcement was controlled, pigeons had a strong preference for matching over pseudo-matching (there was a sample but it did not indicate which comparison stimulus was correct). Experiment 1 of the present study replicated and extended the results of the Zentall and Stagner study by including an identity relation between the sample and one of the comparison stimuli in both the matching and pseudo-matching tasks. In Experiment 2, when we asked if the pigeons would still prefer matching if we equated the two tasks for probability of reinforcement, we found no systematic preference for matching over pseudo-matching. Thus, it appears that in the absence of differential reinforcement, the information provided by a sample that signals which of the two comparison stimuli is correct is insufficient to produce a preference for that alternative.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
FANTINO, E;CASE, DA
通讯作者：
CASE, DA
影响因子：
5.4
作者：
BERLYNE, DE
通讯作者：
BERLYNE, DE
DOI：
10.1098/rspb.2010.1607
发表时间：
2011-04-22
影响因子：
4.7
作者：
Zentall, Thomas R.;Stagner, Jessica
通讯作者：
Stagner, Jessica
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Green, L;Myerson, J;Estle, SJ
通讯作者：
Estle, SJ
影响因子：
29.3
作者：
DINSMOOR, JA
通讯作者：
DINSMOOR, JA