Attention and generalization during a conditional discrimination.
Pigeons (and maybe your clients) can master conditional tasks without shifting attention between parts of a compound cue.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers taught pigeons a conditional task. If the birds saw one color, they had to peck the line that matched its angle. If they saw a different color, they had to peck the line that did NOT match.
The team then tested whether the birds still chose correctly when the colors were changed slightly. They also watched where the birds looked to see if they shifted attention between the color and the line.
What they found
The pigeons generalized. They kept choosing correctly even when the colors were not the exact ones used in training.
Some birds looked more at the color, others more at the line, but these looking patterns did not predict accuracy. The birds did not need to switch attention between parts of the picture to get the trial right.
How this fits with other research
Meltzer (1983) later showed that placing a confusing cue on the key that would NOT pay off made pigeons even sharper. Together the two studies tell us that birds can use, or ignore, parts of a compound stimulus depending on payoff.
Nevin et al. (2005) built a math model that says reinforcement rate sets an invisible "attending probability." Their model explains why accurate choices can happen without any visible attention shift, matching the 1969 data.
Lyons (1995) reviewed many tests and concluded that simply looking at a feature more often is what builds control, not fancy shifts between features. The 1969 finding that differential control needs no attention jump fits that view.
Why it matters
For your learners, this means you do not have to train them to "look at the right part." Arrange the reinforcement so the correct feature pays off, and stimulus control can emerge even if scanning looks uneven. Check accuracy, not eye gaze, when you judge whether a conditional discrimination is solid.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Put the critical cue on the side that pays off and let reinforcement do the teaching; stop worrying if the learner’s eyes wander.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
A conditional discrimination was established and analyzed, using four pigeons. The discrimination was among four compound stimuli projected on the response key-a white circle or triangle on a red or green background-during two conditions of illumination in the chamber, no illumination or flashing illumination. The two lighting conditions indicated whether the stimuli on the key containing triangles or those containing red would be the occasion for reinforcement. After the discrimination formed, generalization to intermediate and extreme values of the conditional stimulus and the attention of the birds to separate aspects of the stimulus on the key under each of the conditional stimuli were studied. All subjects generalized across values of the conditional stimulus, the lighting of the chamber. But subjects differed in the manner in which they treated the compound stimuli: two tended to attend to one or the other aspect of the stimulus on the key depending on the conditional stimulus, and two offered no evidence of such selective attention. Thus, the differential control of responding by the conditional stimuli cannot be attributed to a shift in attention between the figure and ground aspects of the compound stimuli.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1969 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1969.12-911