Translations in Stimulus-Stimulus Pairing: Autoshaping of Learner Vocalizations.

Stimulus-stimulus pairing (SSP) is a procedure used by behavior analysis practitioners that capitalizes on respondent conditioning processes to elicit vocalizations. These procedures usually are implemented only after other, more customary methods (e.g., standard echoic training via modeling) have been exhausted. Unfortunately, SSP itself has mixed research support, probably because certain as-yet-unidentified procedural variations are more effective than others. Even when SSP produces (or increases) vocalizations, its effects can be short-lived. Although specific features of SSP differ across published accounts, fundamental characteristics include presentation of a vocal stimulus proximal with presentation of a preferred item. In the present article, we draw parallels between SSP procedures and autoshaping, review factors shown to affect autoshaping, and interpret autoshaping research for suggested SSP tests and applications. We then call for extended use and reporting of SSP in behavior-analytic treatments. Finally, three bridges created by this article are identified: basic-applied, respondent-operant, and behavior analysis with other sciences.

Resurgence in Siamese fighting fish, Betta splendens.

Resurgence of previously reinforced responding was investigated in male Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens). Swimming through a ring produced 15-s mirror presentations according to, with different fish, either a fixed-ratio 1 or a variable-interval 60-s schedule of reinforcement. When responding was stable, a differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior schedule was substituted for the mirror-presentation schedule. Following this, mirror presentations were discontinued (extinction). During this latter phase, there were transient increases in the ring-swim response relative to the frequency of such responding during the differential-reinforcement-of-other behavior schedule. Resurgence was similar for the fish exposed previously to the fixed-ratio or to the variable-interval schedule. These results extend to Siamese fighting fish a well-established behavioral phenomenon previously not observed in this species or with this response topography, and only rarely reported following the removal of a non-consumable reinforcer.

Why pigeons say what they do: reinforcer magnitude and response requirement effects on say responding in say-do correspondence.

The effects of reinforcer magnitude and response requirement on pigeons' say choices in an experimental homologue of human say-do correspondence were assessed in two experiments. The procedure was similar to a conditional discrimination procedure except the pigeons chose both a sample stimulus (the say component) and a comparison stimulus that corresponded to it (the do component). Correspondence was trained on red, green, and white key colors before the duration of food presentations following correspondence on each key color (Experiment 1) and the number of key pecks required as the say response on each key color (Experiment 2) were manipulated in an attempt to influence the initial say response. The frequency of say responses on each key color coincided with programmed changes in the duration of food presentations and the key-peck requirements assigned to each key color. Correspondence accuracy remained stable in all conditions, even those in which the say responding occurred primarily on two of the three key colors. Implications for human behavior are discussed.

Differential resurgence and response elimination.

Resurgence refers to the transient recovery of previously reinforced, but presently not reinforced, responding when more recently reinforced responding is extinguished. The primary purpose of our research was to determine how differential resurgence results from the procedures used to eliminate that responding. There were three conditions in each of five experiments. In Condition 1, key pecking by pigeons was maintained under a two-component multiple variable-interval (VI) 30-s VI 30-s schedule. In Condition 2, this pecking was eliminated in different ways across components. In Condition 3, extinction was in effect for all responses, and resurgence of key pecking was compared across components. These three conditions were repeated for most pigeons, and the procedures used to eliminate responding in Condition 2 varied across experiments. In Experiment 1, there was greater resurgence, and an earlier onset of it, after a differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (DRO) schedule than after a VI schedule was correlated with pecking an alternative key. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that the differential resurgence in Experiment 1 probably was not due to conditional stimulus control or the periodicity of food delivery, respectively. In Experiment 4, there was no systematic difference in resurgence after either a DRO schedule or a VI schedule correlated with treadle pressing. In Experiment 5, there was greater resurgence, and/or an earlier onset of it, after a VI schedule correlated with treadle pressing than after a VI schedule correlated with pecking an alternative key. Taken together, the results showed that the reinforcement of an alternative key-peck response was the most effective means of reducing subsequent key-peck resurgence. The relation of these results to an understanding of resurgence is discussed.

Contextual determinants of temporal control: Behavioral contrast in a free-operant psychophysical procedure.

The question of how temporal control of responding might be influenced by contingency changes in other contexts was investigated. Each of three pigeons first was exposed to a two-component multiple schedule in which a two-key free-operant psychophysical procedure operated in one component and a variable-interval schedule operated in the other component. The variable-interval schedule then was changed to extinction while the free-operant psychophysical procedure remained unchanged. Finally, the variable-interval schedule was reintroduced. Response rates on the left key and the estimated temporal threshold under the free-operant psychophysical procedure increased for each pigeon when the alternate component schedule was changed to extinction and then decreased again when the variable-interval schedule was reintroduced. The results suggest one way that temporal control is affected by its context, and may be interpreted through the direct effects of overall reinforcement rate on temporal control mechanisms or the disruptive effects of alternative sources of reinforcement on temporally controlled behavior.