"Benjamin" <Benjamin from verizon.net> wrote in message
news:U7SSh.24134$Rg2.5688 from trndny02...
I've got ' minute', but need more info.
>> "Glen M. Sizemore" <gmsizemore2 from yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:461b59fa$0$2689$ed362ca5 from nr2.newsreader.com...> |
> | "Benjamin" <Benjamin from verizon.net> wrote in message
> | news:zCGSh.6251$FC5.2247 from trndny06...> |
> | "Glen M. Sizemore" <gmsizemore2 from yahoo.com> wrote in message
> | > news:4618d1a3$0$22574$ed362ca5 from nr2.newsreader.com...> |
> | <snip>
> | >
> | > The left-key is always-green after it is
> | > pecked, and its contingencies always
> | > have longer-feeding-'time' and short-
> | > er-delay-'time' built-into them [relative
> | > to the contingencies of the right-key [in
> | > 2., above] when the right-key is red.
> | I don't think you understand how the
> | procedure works.
>> | If the right key is pecked, BOTH keys
> | are illuminated after t s, one red, the
> | other green,
>> OK, I'll make this change.
>> | if the left key is pecked, only the green
> | option is available.
>> 1. Given this both-"green"-and-"red"
> 'state'. Is the "green option" =only= on the
> left, or does "green" show-up, 'randomly',
> on =either= "left" or "right"?
In the experiment in question, position was probably randomized. However,
this is not going to help you answer the question. Biases do develop, but
are not very pronounced when the choices are asymmetric.
>> | > When the right-key is green, it's contin-
> | > gencies are the same as those which
> | > always occur when the left-[always-
> | > green]-key is pecked.
> | > When the right-key is red, it's contingen-
> | > cies yield a shorter-feeding-'time' and
> | > a longer-delay, relative to the left-[always-
> | > green]-key -- which the pigeon experienc-
> | > es as a 'negative' condition, relative to
> | > 'the' green-key [[left or right].
> | This is not correct -
>> 2. I'll start-over with the New information
> you've given me, but as I'd interpreted
> the 'test', using all of the information
> you provided, what I wrote is Correct.
I said that pecking the red key produced 3.0 s access to food after a 1.0 s
delay. Pecking green yields 12.0 s after a 4.0 s delay. That's what I said.
So I don't know how you got: "When the right-key is red, it's contingencies
yield a shorter-feeding-'time' and a longer-delay, relative to the
> [It's =your= 'test'. I can't add anything
> to what you provided, which is why
> I asked you to be sure your statement
> of your 'test' was accurate.]
>> | but I don't know which "delay" you are
> | talking about (what I am calling the
> | delay or the ITI).
>> 3. Again, I'll start-over with the New inform-
> ation you've given me, but, in the ['now'-
> agreed-to-be-incorrect] interpretation that
> I discussed [Correctly], I was referring to
> two 'states' -- "food-available" and "no-
>> The "delay" I wrote of was the ratio of
> 'times' of "having-access-to-food" to
> "not-having-access-to-food", proportion-
> al to 'time' in the "green" choice vs. 'time'
> in the "red" choice.
>> There's a difference in this "delay" built
> into the two contingencies ["green" vs.
> "red", regardless of position].
Again, pecking red results in 3.0 s food at a 1.0 s delay. Pecking green
results in 12.0 s food at a 4.0 s delay.
> The ratio-proportionality literally values
> each 'state' relative to the pigeon's innate
> food-correlated [energy-Determined] Sur-
> vival propensity.
>> Which is why my analysis of the [incorrect]
> 'test' was Correct.
>> | When both red and green are illuminated
> | (after a right key peck in the "initial link"
> | and the passage of t s,) pecking the red
> | key produces access to food after 1.0 s,
> | while pecking green yields food after 4.0 s.
>> 4. In this "both-green-and-red-lighted" stim-
> ulus 'state', does "green" always appear
> on the left and "red" on the right, or do
> "green" and "red" positions vary 'random'-
> ly? [It makes a difference, overall.]
Quite possibly not under these circumstances.
>> | Notice also that the ITI is chosen such
> | that the delay to food, food access dura-
> | tion, and ITI sum to 24.0 s.
>> 5. Yes, but the "green" is 12/24 "food-access"
> and "red" is 3/24 "food-access".
That is correct.
>> "Green": the pigeon [ideally] spends half
> of it's 'time' "eating".
>> "Red": the pigeon [ideally] spends 1/8 of
> it's 'time' eating.
That is correct.
>> A "green"-pecking pigeon eats four times
> as much as a "red"-pecking pigeon.
That is correct.
>> =Many= things can weigh-upon what
> any given pigeon will actually do, but
> all else being equal, pigeons who
> peck-"green" eat more, and, thus,
> Survive-better, relative to pigeons who
> peck-"red" [regardless of position, but,
> as I discussed in my earlier reply, there's
> an enhanced-efficiency in =always= peck-
> ing the left-key [be-cause of the "super-
> system-configuration" energy-consump-
> tion differentials that are discussed ex-
> plicitly with respect to pigeon-behavior
> ["walking" vs. "running" vs. "flying"] in the
> excerpt I posted from AoK, Ap5. [which
> is why I posted the excerpt.] It's a 'de-
> ficiency' built-into "Skinner Boxes" that
> they artificially-restrict behavior as they
> are used to 'explain behavior'.
Yes. Its called "laboratory science."
> observed in a "Skinner Box" is =not=
> Behavior, but an artificially-imposed
> set of Experimenter-and-pigeon-inter-
> active dynamics. Be-cause of this, the
> Experimenter is actually =in- the Box
> =with= the pigeon. Which is what I
> said in my not-too-long-ago reply to
> another post of yours.]
As Skinner was fond of saying, pigeons have changed my behavior far more
than I have changed theirs.
>> | So, no matter what choices the bird
> | makes, if it makes them fairly quickly,
> | it will get some food every 24.0 s (plus
> | the time it takes to make the pecks).
> | [...]
>> 6. Guaranteed-4-x-food is better than
> "some"-food [not only in terms of "food",
> but also be-cause the lower the num-
> ber of major supersystem-configura-
> tion alterations, the more-efficient
> [less-energy-consuming] the pigeon's
> information-processing-work will be --
> so, given the artificially-delimited con-
> straints of the "Box", and given x energy,
> the always-peck-"green" pigeon can
> do more with the x energy than can a
> pigeon that does anything else.
>> =Everything= in all of Behavior [and all
> of Cognition] is [ideally] like this -- be-
> cause of the one-way flow of energy,
> from order to disorder that is what's
> =described= by 2nd Thermo [WDB2T],
> which permeates all of physical real-
> ity, it's always Possible to converge-
> upon =One= "condition" that's Best
> [within the resolving-power of the
> system that 'sees' WDB2T.]
>> Which is what my long-former discuss-
> ions of 'movement' upon [within] Truth's-
> One-Map and the 'necessity' of "ranging-
> widely" were about, and which is what
> Truth physically is.
>> Now, if you'll set-me-straight with re-
> spect to the question in 1. and 4., above,
> I'll begin-again, redoing my analysis with
> the New information you've provided
> and post further discussion after I've
> done the analysis.
>> ken [k. p. collins]