ABSTRACT
In this chapter, the author suggests that the attention directed to the autoshaping of pigeons has been something of a mixed blessing. Any comprehensive theory of classical conditioning needs to contain two parts: a model of associative learning and a performance model. Much research on the interactions between classical and instrumental conditioning has been stimulated by the discovery of autoshaping. The explanation of behavioral contrast that the idea has suggested is based on a rather simple theory of behavioral interactions between classical and instrumental conditioning. The chapter presents some evidence for considering the lever-press, or sign-tracking, response and the tray-entry, or goal-tracking, response as competing forms of behavior. It suggests that the predictability of reinforcement might affect tray entry much more than lever pressing. The loop-pull response was relatively easy to shape, especially compared to a response that consisted of some movement of the foot, and no problem arose in maintaining it on interval schedules of reinforcement.
