|
| International Symposium - The Temporal Control of Behavior |
| Sunday, May 28, 2006 |
| 9:00 AM–10:20 AM |
| Hong Kong |
| Area: EAB; Domain: Basic Research |
| Chair: Kennon A. Lattal (West Virginia University) |
| Abstract: Recent empirical and theoretical developments related to better understanding how temporal events come to control behavior will be presented by four groups of investigators. |
| |
| Resistance to Change of Temporal Discrimination. |
| RYAN D. WARD (Utah State University), Amy Odum (Utah State University) |
| Abstract: Recently, Nevin and colleagues reported that baseline accuracy and resistance to change of color matching was greater in a higher reinforcement probability component (.8) than in a lower reinforcement probability component (.2). This experiment examined whether a similar result would be obtained when the stimulus to be discriminated was the duration of a temporal sample. Five pigeons responded under a multiple schedule of temporal- discrimination procedures. In one component, correct categorization of short (2 s) and long (8 s) sample durations was reinforced with a high probability (.8), while in the other component correct sample categorization was reinforced with a lower probability (.2). Consistent with previous results, baseline accuracy was higher in the high-reinforcement probability component than in the low-reinforcement probability component. Resistance to change of temporal discrimination in the two components was assessed by disrupting with prefeeding, delays between samples and comparisons, intercomponent-interval food, and extinction. |
| |
| Analysis of Reinforcement Duration Sequence and Temporal Tracking in Pigeons. |
| JENNIFER J. HIGA (Texas Christian University), D. Donahue (Texas Christian University), L. Madden (Texas Christian University) |
| Abstract: Previous studies show that under certain conditions temporal performance on fixed interval (FI) schedules depends on the duration of the reinforcer. For example, when different reinforcer durations are intermixed within a session, post-reinforcement pause (PRP) duration depends directly on reinforcer duration. The purpose of the present study was to investigate sequential dependencies between reinforcer duration and measures of the temporal control of behavior by presenting pigeons a brief transition in the duration of reinforcement. A program delivered reinforcers according to an FI 60s and all sessions began with reinforcer duration of four seconds (standard). Reinforcer duration changed from four to eight then back to four seconds for a group of birds and from four to two back to four seconds for another group. Within each group, the relatively longer or shorter reinforcer duration either occurred in succession or were separated by the standard reinforcer duration. We will present trial-by-trial and overall measures of temporal performance and discuss the implications of our results for models of timing. |
| |
| Resistance of Temporally Controlled Behavior to Change. |
| MIRARI ELKORO (West Virginia University), Kennon A. Lattal (West Virginia University) |
| Abstract: Pigeons were trained on a modified peak-interval procedure. Sequences with the same stimuli consisted of a variable number of FI 30s trials (2, 3, 4 or 5) and 90s unreinforced trials, were separated by a 90s blackout. Three locations within the FI trials (first, random and last) were employed for delivery of response-independent food to examine the resistance to change of stabilized temporal control. Changes from baseline were observed through calculation of quarter-life values for the FI and peak trials, peak times, and peak rates. Definition of delay of disruption gradients, likened to delay of reinforcement gradients, was possible with the results obtained. |
| |
| Time without a Clock: Biologicaly Plausible? |
| JEAN-CLAUDE DARCHEVILLE (University of Lille, France) |
| Abstract: The various models of temporal control of behavior without any explicit timing mechanism are based on implicit neurological mechanisms. We will try to clarify them and confront them with the current biological data. |
|
| |