Scene-based contextual cueing in pigeons

Abstract

Repeated pairings of a particular visual context with a specific location of a target stimulus facilitate target search in humans. We explored an animal model of such contextual cueing. Pigeons had to peck a target, which could appear in 1 of 4 locations on color photographs of real-world scenes. On half of the trials, each of 4 scenes was consistently paired with 1 of 4 possible target locations; on the other half of the trials, each of 4 different scenes was randomly paired with the same 4 possible target locations. In Experiments 1 and 2, pigeons exhibited robust contextual cueing when the context preceded the target by 1 s to 8 s, with reaction times to the target being shorter on predictive-scene trials than on random-scene trials. Pigeons also responded more frequently during the delay on predictive-scene trials than on random-scene trials; indeed, during the delay on predictive-scene trials, pigeons predominately pecked toward the location of the upcoming target, suggesting that attentional guidance contributes to contextual cueing. In Experiment 3, involving left-right and top-bottom scene reversals, pigeons exhibited stronger control by global than by local scene cues. These results attest to the robustness and associative basis of contextual cueing in pigeons.

Figure 1

Examples of the predictive scene stimuli shown with the target stimulus superimposed in the four possible target locations. Each pigeon was shown uniquely counterbalanced context-target location pairings.

Figure 2

Mean RTs in Experiments 1a and 2c: 2-s delay. Top Panel: Mean Log RTs (ms) for the Predictive and Random conditions as a function of days of training in Experiment 1a: 2-s delay. Bottom Panel: Mean Log RTs (ms) for the Predictive and Random conditions as a function of days of training in Experiment 2c: 2-s delay. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. As a guide to calibrating Log RTs to RTs (ms): Log RT of 6 = 403 ms, Log RT of 6.5 = 665 ms, Log RT of 7 = 1,097 ms, and Log RT of 7.5 = 1,808 ms.

Figure 3

Mean rate of anticipatory responding in Experiments 1a and 2c: 2-s delay. Top Panel: Mean pecks per s in the Predictive and Random conditions as a function of days of training in Experiment 1a: 2-s delay. Bottom Panel: Mean pecks per s in the Predictive and Random conditions as a function of days of training in Experiment 2c: 2-s delay. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean.

Figure 4

Mean rate of correct vs. incorrect anticipatory responding in Experiments 1a and 2c: 2-s delay. Top Panel: Mean rate of correct vs. incorrect anticipatory responding in pecks per s as a function of days of training in Experiment 1a: 2-s delay. Bottom Panel: Mean rate of correct vs. incorrect anticipatory responding in pecks per s as a function of days of training in Experiment 2c: 2-s delay. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean.

Figure 5

Mean RTs for the 5 SOA conditions in Experiments 1b and 2b: Variable delays. Top Panel: Mean Log RTs (ms) for the Predictive and Random conditions for each SOA in Experiment 1b: Variable delays. Bottom Panel: Mean Log RTs (ms) for the Predictive and Random conditions for each SOA in Experiment 2b: Variable delays. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. As a guide to calibrating Log RTs to RTs (ms): Log RT of 6 = 403 ms, Log RT of 6.5 = 665 ms, Log RT of 7 = 1,097 ms, and Log RT of 7.5 = 1,808 ms.

Figure 6

Mean rate of anticipatory responding in Experiments 1b and 2b: Variable delays. Top Panel: Mean pecks per s in the Predictive and Random conditions for each SOA in Experiment 1b: Variable delays. Bottom Panel: Mean pecks per s in the Predictive and Random conditions for each SOA in Experiment 2b: Variable delays. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean.

Figure 7

Mean rate of correct vs. incorrect anticipatory responding in Experiments 1b and 2b: Variable delays. Top Panel: Mean rate of correct vs. incorrect anticipatory responding in pecks per s for each SOA in Experiment 1b: Variable delays. Bottom Panel: Mean rate of correct vs. incorrect anticipatory responding in pecks per s for each SOA in Experiment 2b: Variable delays. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean.

Figure 8

Mean Log RTs (ms) in Experiments 1c and 2a: 0-s delay. Top Panel: Mean Log RTs (ms) for the Predictive and Random conditions as a function of days of training in Experiment 1c: 0-s delay. Bottom Panel: Mean Log RTs (ms) for the Predictive and Random conditions as a function of days of training in Experiment 2a: 0-s delay. Error bars represent the standard error of the mean. As a guide to calibrating Log RTs to RTs (ms): Log RT of 6 = 403 ms, Log RT of 6.5 = 665 ms, Log RT of 7 = 1,097 ms, and Log RT of 7.5 = 1,808 ms.

Figure 9

Top Panel: The mean Log RT (ms) and the standard error of the mean for each Training and Testing condition in Experiment 3. Bottom Panel: Examples of the Training (left) and Testing (right) contextual stimuli paired with the target stimulus superimposed in the designated locations in the Horizontal Local (top-left), Horizontal Global (top-right), Vertical Local (bottom-left), and Vertical Global (bottom-right) conditions in Experiment 3. As a guide to calibrating Log RTs to RTs (ms): Log RT of 6 = 403 ms, Log RT of 6.5 = 665 ms, and Log RT of 7 = 1,097 ms.

Figure 10

Top Panel: Mean anticipatory pecks per s to GC, LC, PO, and IM locations for the Horizontal vs. Vertical Cue conditions in Experiment 3. Bottom Panel: Examples of the GC, LC, PO, and IM locations for the Horizontal vs. Vertical Cue conditions in Experiment 3.