Timing, remembering, and discrimination.
Extra memory demands will briefly scramble timed choices, but steady practice pulls accuracy back to pure timing levels.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers taught pigeons to tell short delays from long ones. Birds saw a color, waited, then pecked left for "short" or right for "long."
On some trials the color stayed on during the wait. On others it vanished, so birds had to "remember" both the color and the time.
What they found
At first, adding the memory cue wrecked accuracy. Birds acted as if the extra information confused them.
After many sessions the birds bounced back. Their choice patterns looked just like the pure timing birds — smooth curves that slid from "short" to "long."
How this fits with other research
de Villiers (1980) and Rutter et al. (1987) already showed pigeons can time events cleanly. Stancliffe et al. (2007) adds a twist: mix in a memory load and timing breaks, then recovers.
Arantes et al. (2011) later showed errorless prompting speeds up the same kind of task. Together the two papers give you a roadmap: expect a dip when you add memory cues, then use errorless fades to climb back faster.
Older memory work like Griffin et al. (1977) warned that short delays hurt recall. Stancliffe et al. (2007) agrees early on, but shows extended practice can erase the damage.
Why it matters
When you teach learners to wait or to recall a cue after a delay, brace for a brief drop in accuracy. Keep trials running; the data say performance will realign to the timing goal. If you need faster recovery, borrow Joana’s errorless tricks — prompt the correct choice early, then fade.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →If accuracy drops when you add a ‘remember’ cue, stay the course — don’t thin the schedule until the curve smooths out again.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Four pigeons were first trained in a timing procedure. In one condition, each trial began with the presentation of an X on the center key, followed by a delay (short or long), after which two side keys were lit. If the delay was short, pecks to the red side key were reinforced. If the delay was long, pecks to the green side key were reinforced. In a second condition, the opposite contingencies applied following presentation of a square on the center key. Choice responses were then tested at 10 time intervals ranging from short to long (1 to 4 s and 4 to 7 s in different conditions). The two timing conditions were combined to create a remembering condition in which correct responding depended upon discrimination of both the sample stimulus (X or square) and the delay interval (short or long). Choices varied systematically across delay in timing conditions, but in remembering conditions, accurate choice at the training delays did not initially generalize to intermediate delays. However, with prolonged training in the remembering task, the response pattern began to resemble that of the timing conditions. Generalization gradients were asymmetrical, in accordance with Weber's Law, in that greater generalization occurred with longer delays than with shorter delays.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2007 · doi:10.1901/jeab.2007.25-05