Discriminated timeout avoidance in pigeons: the roles of added stimuli

Abstract

Two experiments examined pigeons' postponement of a signaled extinction period, or timeout (TO), from an ongoing schedule of response-dependent food delivery. A concurrent-operant procedure was used in which responses on one (food) key produced food according to a variable-interval schedule and responses on a second (postponement) key delayed the next scheduled TO according to a response-TO (R-TO) interval. A series of response-independent stimulus changes on the food key temporally partitioned the R-TO into three equal segments (S1, S2, and S3). Postponement responses, in addition to postponing TO, also reinstated S1, the stimulus correlated with the greatest temporal distance from TO. In Experiment 1, the R-TO interval was manipulated systematically across blocks of sessions (conditions) at a given ratio of R-TO:TO duration. This R-TO:TO ratio was manipulated across blocks of conditions (phases). Postponement response rates varied inversely with R-TO interval in each phase. Changes in the R-TO:TO ratio did not produce consistent differences except at the 1:10 ratio for some pigeons, where it disrupted postponement responding in some conditions. Most of the postponement responses occurred in the presence of S2 and S3, the stimuli most proximal to TO, whereas most of the food-key responses occurred in S1. In Experiment 2, the R-TO contingencies were systematically manipulated in the presence of the time-correlated stimuli. In one set of conditions, the R-TO contingencies were made either ineffective or less effective in the presence of one or more stimuli. Postponement responses typically shifted to stimuli in the presence of which responses were relatively more effective. Postponement responses decreased markedly when the added stimuli were removed, and then recovered when the stimuli were reinstated. Results from both experiments indicate that the added stimuli in a discriminated TO-avoidance procedure serve predominately discriminative functions, delineating periods during which behavior is maximally effective. The results parallel those obtained in shock-avoidance procedures, providing further evidence that TO functions as an aversive stimulus.

Fig 1. Mean rate of postponement responses for each pigeon over the final five sessions of each R–TO condition, and last session of EXT conditions.

Symbols indicate RTO∶TO duration and appear in the legend in the order of exposure. Unfilled points represent replication conditions.

Fig 2. Mean percent of timeouts avoided for each pigeon over the final five sessions of each condition.

Symbols indicate RTO∶TO duration and appear in the legend in the order of exposure. Unfilled points represent replication conditions.

Fig 3. Mean conditional probability of a postponement response in the presence of the time-correlated stimuli for each pigeon over the final five sessions of each condition.

The data are arrayed vertically by phase (RTO∶TO duration) and horizontally by subject.

Fig 4. Mean proportion of food deliveries in the presence of the time-correlated stimuli for each pigeon over the final five sessions of each condition.

The data are arrayed vertically by phase (RTO∶TO duration) and horizontally by subject.

Fig 5. Mean conditional probability of a postponement response in the presence of the time-correlated stimuli for each pigeon over the final five sessions of baseline (BL), Partial Extinction (PE), and Partial Postponement (PP) conditions in Experiment 2.

See text for other details.

Fig 6. Mean conditional probability of a postponement response in the presence of the time-correlated stimuli for each pigeon over the final five sessions of baseline (BL) and Nondiscriminated Avoidance (ND) conditions.