Three experiments evaluated whether the apparent reflexivity effect reported by for pigeons might, in fact, be transitivity. In Experiment 1, pigeons learned symmetrically reinforced hue–form (A–B) and form–hue (B–A) successive matching. Those also trained on form–form (B–B) matching responded more to hue comparisons that matched their preceding samples on subsequent hue–hue (A–A) probe trials. By contrast, most pigeons trained on just A–B and B–A matching did not show this effect; but some did—a finding consistent with transitivity. Experiment 2 showed that the latter pigeons also responded more to form comparisons that matched their preceding samples on form–form (B–B) probe trials. Experiment 3 tested the prediction that hue–hue matching versus hue–hue oddity, respectively, should emerge after symmetrically versus asymmetrically reinforced arbitrary matching relations if those relations are truly transitive. For the few pigeons showing an emergent effect, comparison response rates were higher when a probe–trial comparison matched its preceding sample independently of the baseline contingencies. These results indicate neither a reflexivity nor a transitivity effect but, rather, a possible identity bias.
展开▼
