Comprehensive Physiology Wiley Online Library
For Librarians For Authors Editors About

Sensory Function in Animals

W. C. Stebbins, C. H. Brown, M. R. Petersen

10.1002/cphy.cp010304

Source: Supplement 3: Handbook of Physiology, The Nervous System, Sensory Processes

Originally published: 1984

Published online: January 2011

Full Article on Wiley Online Library



Abstract

The sections in this article are:

1 Behavioral Principles
1.1 Operant and Respondent Conditioning
1.2 Schedules of Stimulus Presentation and Reinforcement
1.3 Development of Stimulus Control
1.4 Auditory Stimulus Control in Guinea Pig
1.5 Response Shaping
1.6 Behavioral Sequences
1.7 Negative Reinforcement Procedures
2 Sensation
2.1 Threshold Procedures
2.2 Sound Localization in Monkey
2.3 Visual Acuity in Cat
2.4 Relation of Psychophysics to Structure and Physiological Function
2.5 Relation of Hearing Impairment and Inner Ear Damage in Guinea Pig
2.6 Somatosensory Discrimination in Monkeys and Humans
2.7 Criteria for Selection of Behavioral Procedures
3 Perception
3.1 Loudness Judgment in Monkeys
3.2 Brightness Scaling in Pigeon
3.3 Visual Aftereffects in Monkey
3.4 Use of Generalization Procedure
4 Summary
Figure 1. Figure 1.

State diagrams of respondent and operant conditioning procedures. Diagrams shown here and in Fig. 3 describe sequential response contingencies, stimulus presentations, and temporal events that occur under the conditions of the experiment. The respondent conditioning state diagram specifies that a conditioned stimulus (CS) of duration T is presented and its termination is followed immediately by an unconditioned stimulus (US) of duration T. The operant conditioning diagram indicates that the operant response (R) in the presence of the discriminative stimulus (SD) produces a positive reinforcer (SR+) of duration T.
Figure 2. Figure 2.

Schematic view of testing chamber used in determining the guinea pig's audibility function. Response disks are 3.8 cm above the floor and 11.5 cm apart. Feeder tray located midway between response disks projects 3.3 cm into chamber. Speaker is positioned directly over left disk.

From Prosen, Petersen, Moody, and Stebbins 39
Figure 3. Figure 3.

State diagrams representing successive stages in a training regimen for guinea pigs for a two‐response auditory testing procedure. Conditions for initial training are shown in A. Final testing procedure is shown in H. Intermediate stages B‐G indicate addition of response contingencies until final conditions in H are in effect. A: first phase of training. Only the report disk light is on (LR). Any orientation toward, approach, or contact (O, A, C) of report disk (DR) produces a food pellet. The sequence begins anew after delivery of food pellet. B: second phase. There is a continuous tone; a nose‐press of the reporting disk (RR) turns the tone off for the duration of feeder operation and produces a food pellet. C: third phase. A tone is turned on aperiodically (VT); a reporting response (RR) terminates the tone and produces food. D: phase four. Observing disk light (Lo) and reporting disk light (LR) are both illuminated; any orientation toward, approach, or contact with the observing disk (Do) initiates the tone and sets the occasion for an RR. E: fifth stage. A nose‐press of the observing disk (Ro) produces the tone. F: sixth phase. Variable ratio (VR) of Ro [VR (Ro)] must be completed to produce the tone. G: seventh phase. After passage of an aperiodic interval of time in the first state of this phase, a null state is entered. The null state simply designates a required programming state, which is associated with no change in stimulus conditions. Emission of an Ro while in the null state produces a tone. H: final procedure. An Ro must be emitted within 2 s of entry into the null state to produce a 3‐s tone. Failure to complete an Ro during the 2‐s null state or an RR during the 3‐s tone simply results in a return to the first state and the sequence starts anew. An RR in the absence of a tone (i.e., during the first two states) results in a 15‐s time‐out (TO). An RR during the tone produces a food pellet.
Figure 4. Figure 4.

Weight‐growth curves. ◯, Free‐feeding domestic guinea pig (Cavia porcellus); •, C. aperea, a wild relative of C. porcellus, Δ, S5, and ▴, S6—members of C. porcellus trained in behavioral task described in text. C. porcellus data from Poiley 37 and Ediger 13; C. aperea data from Rood 45.

From Petersen, Stebbins, et al. 35. Copyright 1977 by the Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Inc
Figure 5. Figure 5.

A cumulative response record from part of a session for one guinea pig. Observing responses (R) step the pen upward. Brief deflections of the pen indicate reinforcement (SR) of a correct detection; more prolonged deflections represent time‐outs (TO) for incorrect reports. Inset: scale for number of responses (vertical dimension) and time (horizontal dimension); slopes for average response per min rates of 25, 50, and 100 are also given and may be used for visual alignment with the actual cumulative response curve for the experimental subject.

From Petersen, Stebbins, et al. 35. Copyright 1977 by the Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Inc
Figure 6. Figure 6.

A psychophysical function for one guinea pig for a 40‐kHz test tone constructed by plotting the percentage of trials on which a correct detection occurred at each of seven different stimulus intensities.
Figure 7. Figure 7.

Psychophysical functions for 3 monkeys. Percentage of correct detections of a change in location of an 8,000‐Hz tone as a function of horizontal displacement of the tone in degrees of arc. Threshold or minimum audible angle is the angle in degrees of arc at which 50% correct detections occurred (i.e., about 11% for record at left). Percentage of catch trials (on which stimulus did not change location) to which the subject responded is displayed over the 0° azimuth point.

Adapted from Brown, Stebbins, et al. 8
Figure 8. Figure 8.

Visual acuity and near point of accommodation in 4 cats. Mean visual acuity ± SD in cycles per degree (C/D) of visual angle is shown as a function of viewing distance. Intersection of the 2 line segments denotes the near point of accommodation. As viewing distance is increased visual acuity increases up to the near point but remains constant beyond it.

Adapted from Bloom and Berkley 4
Figure 9. Figure 9.

Drug‐induced hearing loss and cochlear lesions in guinea pig S5. Top panel represents a cytocochleogram, which indicates the number of receptor cells [one row of inner hair cells, IHC, and 3 rows of outer hair cells, OHC, remaining in each millimeter along basilar membrane of left cochlea after administration of ototoxic drug (200 mg/kg kanamycin sc for 15 days)]. ——, IHC; ……, OHC 1; , OHC 2; —‐, OHC 3. Lower panel represents the hearing loss associated with the cochlear damage.

From Prosen, Petersen, Moody, and Stebbins 39
Figure 10. Figure 10.

Amplitude of mechanical vibration at threshold plotted as a function of oscillation frequency in individual humans (n = 5) and monkeys (n = 6). Vibration was a sinusoidal oscillation varying in amplitude and applied to the glabrous skin of the hand.

From Mountcastle et al. 33
Figure 11. Figure 11.

Correlation of activity in first‐order somatosensory neurons with vibratory detection thresholds. ◯—◯, Mean (± SE) frequency‐threshold function for 6 monkeys; •, thresholds for neural activity recorded from fibers in the monkeys' median nerves. Panels A and B show phase locking (or tuning) and absolute thresholds recorded from rapidly adapting myelinated fibers that are probably associated with Meissner corpuscles. Panels C and D show corresponding phase locking (tuning) and absolute thresholds recorded from Pacinian afferent fibers.

From Mountcastle et al. 33
Figure 12. Figure 12.

Atonal interval and somatosensation of flutter. Psychophysical functions on left represent detection of a 30‐Hz mechanical oscillation in both human (◯—◯) and monkey (•—•) as a function of oscillation amplitude. Curves on right indicate ability of human and monkey observers to discriminate a 30‐Hz flutter from oscillations of different frequency (24 Hz or 36 Hz) as a function of oscillation amplitude. Shaded zone denotes atonal interval, and it brackets the range in amplitude corresponding to absolute threshold and the tuning threshold for β‐sized afferents, believed to be the Meissner afferents. Abscissa is scaled relative to the amplitude associated with the detection threshold (4.8 μm).

From LaMotte and Mountcastle 25
Figure 13. Figure 13.

Auditory threshold function for left ear of one monkey, M‐17, determined by psychophysical methods of limits, constant stimuli, and tracking. ◯, Method of limits; ▪, method of constant stimuli; Δ, tracking.

From Stebbins 55
Figure 14. Figure 14.

Median reaction time as a function of stimulus intensity for one monkey, M‐42. Vertical lines, semi‐interquartile ranges. Inset: frequency distribution of reaction times at 65‐dB sound pressure level from the function of reaction time and stimulus intensity.
Figure 15. Figure 15.

Equal‐latency contours for one monkey derived from latency‐intensity functions for the same animal.

From Pfingst et al. 36
Figure 16. Figure 16.

Equal‐latency contours (—) and equal‐loudness contours (—) for one human subject. Loudness contours are based on verbal instructions to the subject.

From Pfingst et al. 36
Figure 17. Figure 17.

Hypothetical latency‐intensity functions obtained from a normal and abnormal ear. The abnormal function shows recruitment.

From Moody 30, with permission of S. Karger AG, Basel
Figure 18. Figure 18.

Latency‐intensity functions obtained from one monkey immediately and again 24 h after a monaural sound exposure (5‐min exposure, 2,800 Hz at 113 dB, left ear; test tone 4 kHz).

From Moody 30, with permission of S. Karger AG, Basel
Figure 19. Figure 19.

Rate of pecking as a function of the luminance of the stimulus for two different pigeons (109 and 110). Training curve shows prescribed rate of responding at the training stimuli (0, 6, 12, 18, and 24 dB). Points enclosed in squares give rates obtained with test stimuli (3, 9, 15, and 21 dB) in whose presence responding was never reinforced.

From Herrnstein and Van Sommers 21. Copyright 1962 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science
Figure 20. Figure 20.

Influence of visual motion aftereffect induced by viewing a rotating spiral, on ability of one monkey to report direction of change in size of an expanding or contracting circle. Proportion of left lever responses reflects animal's ability to correctly identify circle contraction. Circle was contracting (negative numbers) or expanding (positive numbers) at different rates noted on abcissa and was viewed immediately after fixation of a spiral, which was either stationary (◯), rotating in a clockwise direction (▴), or in a counterclockwise direction (•). Extent of the illusion was measured by horizontal displacement of function obtained under clockwise condition or of function obtained under counterclockwise condition from function obtained under the stationary condition.

From Scott and Milligan 48


Figure 1.

State diagrams of respondent and operant conditioning procedures. Diagrams shown here and in Fig. 3 describe sequential response contingencies, stimulus presentations, and temporal events that occur under the conditions of the experiment. The respondent conditioning state diagram specifies that a conditioned stimulus (CS) of duration T is presented and its termination is followed immediately by an unconditioned stimulus (US) of duration T. The operant conditioning diagram indicates that the operant response (R) in the presence of the discriminative stimulus (SD) produces a positive reinforcer (SR+) of duration T.



Figure 2.

Schematic view of testing chamber used in determining the guinea pig's audibility function. Response disks are 3.8 cm above the floor and 11.5 cm apart. Feeder tray located midway between response disks projects 3.3 cm into chamber. Speaker is positioned directly over left disk.

From Prosen, Petersen, Moody, and Stebbins 39


Figure 3.

State diagrams representing successive stages in a training regimen for guinea pigs for a two‐response auditory testing procedure. Conditions for initial training are shown in A. Final testing procedure is shown in H. Intermediate stages B‐G indicate addition of response contingencies until final conditions in H are in effect. A: first phase of training. Only the report disk light is on (LR). Any orientation toward, approach, or contact (O, A, C) of report disk (DR) produces a food pellet. The sequence begins anew after delivery of food pellet. B: second phase. There is a continuous tone; a nose‐press of the reporting disk (RR) turns the tone off for the duration of feeder operation and produces a food pellet. C: third phase. A tone is turned on aperiodically (VT); a reporting response (RR) terminates the tone and produces food. D: phase four. Observing disk light (Lo) and reporting disk light (LR) are both illuminated; any orientation toward, approach, or contact with the observing disk (Do) initiates the tone and sets the occasion for an RR. E: fifth stage. A nose‐press of the observing disk (Ro) produces the tone. F: sixth phase. Variable ratio (VR) of Ro [VR (Ro)] must be completed to produce the tone. G: seventh phase. After passage of an aperiodic interval of time in the first state of this phase, a null state is entered. The null state simply designates a required programming state, which is associated with no change in stimulus conditions. Emission of an Ro while in the null state produces a tone. H: final procedure. An Ro must be emitted within 2 s of entry into the null state to produce a 3‐s tone. Failure to complete an Ro during the 2‐s null state or an RR during the 3‐s tone simply results in a return to the first state and the sequence starts anew. An RR in the absence of a tone (i.e., during the first two states) results in a 15‐s time‐out (TO). An RR during the tone produces a food pellet.



Figure 4.

Weight‐growth curves. ◯, Free‐feeding domestic guinea pig (Cavia porcellus); •, C. aperea, a wild relative of C. porcellus, Δ, S5, and ▴, S6—members of C. porcellus trained in behavioral task described in text. C. porcellus data from Poiley 37 and Ediger 13; C. aperea data from Rood 45.

From Petersen, Stebbins, et al. 35. Copyright 1977 by the Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Inc


Figure 5.

A cumulative response record from part of a session for one guinea pig. Observing responses (R) step the pen upward. Brief deflections of the pen indicate reinforcement (SR) of a correct detection; more prolonged deflections represent time‐outs (TO) for incorrect reports. Inset: scale for number of responses (vertical dimension) and time (horizontal dimension); slopes for average response per min rates of 25, 50, and 100 are also given and may be used for visual alignment with the actual cumulative response curve for the experimental subject.

From Petersen, Stebbins, et al. 35. Copyright 1977 by the Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Inc


Figure 6.

A psychophysical function for one guinea pig for a 40‐kHz test tone constructed by plotting the percentage of trials on which a correct detection occurred at each of seven different stimulus intensities.



Figure 7.

Psychophysical functions for 3 monkeys. Percentage of correct detections of a change in location of an 8,000‐Hz tone as a function of horizontal displacement of the tone in degrees of arc. Threshold or minimum audible angle is the angle in degrees of arc at which 50% correct detections occurred (i.e., about 11% for record at left). Percentage of catch trials (on which stimulus did not change location) to which the subject responded is displayed over the 0° azimuth point.

Adapted from Brown, Stebbins, et al. 8


Figure 8.

Visual acuity and near point of accommodation in 4 cats. Mean visual acuity ± SD in cycles per degree (C/D) of visual angle is shown as a function of viewing distance. Intersection of the 2 line segments denotes the near point of accommodation. As viewing distance is increased visual acuity increases up to the near point but remains constant beyond it.

Adapted from Bloom and Berkley 4


Figure 9.

Drug‐induced hearing loss and cochlear lesions in guinea pig S5. Top panel represents a cytocochleogram, which indicates the number of receptor cells [one row of inner hair cells, IHC, and 3 rows of outer hair cells, OHC, remaining in each millimeter along basilar membrane of left cochlea after administration of ototoxic drug (200 mg/kg kanamycin sc for 15 days)]. ——, IHC; ……, OHC 1; , OHC 2; —‐, OHC 3. Lower panel represents the hearing loss associated with the cochlear damage.

From Prosen, Petersen, Moody, and Stebbins 39


Figure 10.

Amplitude of mechanical vibration at threshold plotted as a function of oscillation frequency in individual humans (n = 5) and monkeys (n = 6). Vibration was a sinusoidal oscillation varying in amplitude and applied to the glabrous skin of the hand.

From Mountcastle et al. 33


Figure 11.

Correlation of activity in first‐order somatosensory neurons with vibratory detection thresholds. ◯—◯, Mean (± SE) frequency‐threshold function for 6 monkeys; •, thresholds for neural activity recorded from fibers in the monkeys' median nerves. Panels A and B show phase locking (or tuning) and absolute thresholds recorded from rapidly adapting myelinated fibers that are probably associated with Meissner corpuscles. Panels C and D show corresponding phase locking (tuning) and absolute thresholds recorded from Pacinian afferent fibers.

From Mountcastle et al. 33


Figure 12.

Atonal interval and somatosensation of flutter. Psychophysical functions on left represent detection of a 30‐Hz mechanical oscillation in both human (◯—◯) and monkey (•—•) as a function of oscillation amplitude. Curves on right indicate ability of human and monkey observers to discriminate a 30‐Hz flutter from oscillations of different frequency (24 Hz or 36 Hz) as a function of oscillation amplitude. Shaded zone denotes atonal interval, and it brackets the range in amplitude corresponding to absolute threshold and the tuning threshold for β‐sized afferents, believed to be the Meissner afferents. Abscissa is scaled relative to the amplitude associated with the detection threshold (4.8 μm).

From LaMotte and Mountcastle 25


Figure 13.

Auditory threshold function for left ear of one monkey, M‐17, determined by psychophysical methods of limits, constant stimuli, and tracking. ◯, Method of limits; ▪, method of constant stimuli; Δ, tracking.

From Stebbins 55


Figure 14.

Median reaction time as a function of stimulus intensity for one monkey, M‐42. Vertical lines, semi‐interquartile ranges. Inset: frequency distribution of reaction times at 65‐dB sound pressure level from the function of reaction time and stimulus intensity.



Figure 15.

Equal‐latency contours for one monkey derived from latency‐intensity functions for the same animal.

From Pfingst et al. 36


Figure 16.

Equal‐latency contours (—) and equal‐loudness contours (—) for one human subject. Loudness contours are based on verbal instructions to the subject.

From Pfingst et al. 36


Figure 17.

Hypothetical latency‐intensity functions obtained from a normal and abnormal ear. The abnormal function shows recruitment.

From Moody 30, with permission of S. Karger AG, Basel


Figure 18.

Latency‐intensity functions obtained from one monkey immediately and again 24 h after a monaural sound exposure (5‐min exposure, 2,800 Hz at 113 dB, left ear; test tone 4 kHz).

From Moody 30, with permission of S. Karger AG, Basel


Figure 19.

Rate of pecking as a function of the luminance of the stimulus for two different pigeons (109 and 110). Training curve shows prescribed rate of responding at the training stimuli (0, 6, 12, 18, and 24 dB). Points enclosed in squares give rates obtained with test stimuli (3, 9, 15, and 21 dB) in whose presence responding was never reinforced.

From Herrnstein and Van Sommers 21. Copyright 1962 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science


Figure 20.

Influence of visual motion aftereffect induced by viewing a rotating spiral, on ability of one monkey to report direction of change in size of an expanding or contracting circle. Proportion of left lever responses reflects animal's ability to correctly identify circle contraction. Circle was contracting (negative numbers) or expanding (positive numbers) at different rates noted on abcissa and was viewed immediately after fixation of a spiral, which was either stationary (◯), rotating in a clockwise direction (▴), or in a counterclockwise direction (•). Extent of the illusion was measured by horizontal displacement of function obtained under clockwise condition or of function obtained under counterclockwise condition from function obtained under the stationary condition.

From Scott and Milligan 48
References
 1. Barber, S. B. Sense organs. In: Encyclopedia of Biological Sciences (2nd ed.), edited by P. Gray New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1970, p. 843–845.
 2. Bernard, C. An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine, transl. by H. C. Greene New York: Henry Schuman, 1949.
 3. Blackman, D. E. Conditioned suppression and the effects of classical conditioning on operant behavior. In: Handbook of Operant Behavior, edited by W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall, 1977, p. 340–363. (Century Psychol. Ser.)
 4. Bloom, M., and M. A. Berkley. Visual acuity and the near point of accommodation in cats. Vision Res. 17: 723–730, 1977.
 5. Blough, D. S. A method for obtaining psychophysical thresholds from the pigeon. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 1: 31–43, 1958.
 6. Brady, J. V. Behavioral stress and physiological change: a comparative approach to the experimental analysis of some psychosomatic problems. Trans. NY Acad. Sci. 26: 483–496, 1964.
 7. Brown, C. H. Auditory Localization in Primates: The Role of Stimulus Bandwidth. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan, 1976. Dissertation.
 8. Brown, C. H., M. D. Beecher, D. B. Moody, and W. C. Stebbins. Localization of pure tones by Old World monkeys. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 63: 1484–1492, 1978.
 9. Chocholle, R. Variation des temps de réaction auditif en fonction de l'intensité à diverse fréquences. Année. Psychol. 41: 65–124, 1940.
 10. Dalland, J. I. The measurement of ultrasonic hearing. In: Animal Psychophysics: The Design and Conduct of Sensory Experiments, edited by W. C. Stebbins. New York: Plenum, 1970, p. 21–40.
 11. Dallos, P., and C.‐Y. Wang. Bioelectric correlates of kanamycin intoxication. Audiology 13: 277–289, 1974.
 12. De Villiers, P. Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. In: Handbook of Operant Behavior, edited by W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall, 1977, p. 233–287. (Century Psychol. Ser.)
 13. Ediger, R. D. Care and management. In: The Biology of the Guinea Pig, edited by J. Wagner and P. Manning. New York: Academic, 1976, p. 5–12.
 14. Estes, W. K., and B. F. Skinner. Some quantitative properties of anxiety. J. Exp. Psychol. 29: 390–400, 1941.
 15. Fechner, G. T. Elements of Psychophysics (transl. by H. E. Adler and edited by E. G. Boring and D. H. Howes). New York: Holt, 1966.
 16. Galambos, R. Electrophysiological measurement of human auditory function. In: The Nervous System. Human Communication and its Disorders, edited by D. B. Tower and E. L. Eagles. New York: Raven, 1975, vol. 3, p. 181–190.
 17. Green, S. Auditory sensitivity and equal loudness in the squirrel monkey (Saimiri scuireus). J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 23: 255–264, 1975.
 18. Hawkins, J. E. Drug ototoxicity. In: Handbook of Sensory Physiology, edited by W. D. Keidel and W. D. Neff. Berlin: Springer‐Verlag, 1976, vol. 3, p. 707–748.
 19. Hearst, E., and H. M. Jenkins. Sign Tracking: The Stimulus‐Reinforcer Relation and Directed Action. Austin, TX: Psychonomic Soc., 1974.
 20. Henton, W. W., J. C. Smith, and D. Tucker. Odor discrimination in pigeons. Science 153: 1138–1139, 1966.
 21. Herrnstein, R. J., and P. Van Sommers. Method for sensory scaling with animals. Science 135: 40–41, 1962.
 22. Hineline, P. N. Negative reinforcement and avoidance. In: Handbook of Operant Behavior, edited by W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall, 1977, p. 364–414. (Century Psychol. Ser.)
 23. Hutchinson, R. R. By‐products of aversive control. In: Handbook of Operant Behavior, edited by W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall, 1977, p. 415–431. (Century Psychol. Ser.)
 24. Kimble, G. A. Hilgard and Marquis' Conditioning and Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall, 1961.
 25. LaMotte, R. H., and V. B. Mountcastle. Capacities of humans and monkeys to discriminate between vibratory stimuli of different frequency and amplitude: a correlation between neural events and psychophysical measurements. J. Neurophysiol. 38: 539–559, 1975.
 26. Loop, M. S., and M. A. Berkley. Temporal modulation sensitivity of the cat. I. Behavioral measures. Vision Res. 15: 555–561, 1975.
 27. Lyon, D. O. Conditioned suppression: operant variables and aversive control. Psychol. Rec. 18: 317–338, 1968.
 28. Malott, R. W., and M. K. Malott. Perception and stimulus generalization. In: Animal Psychophysics: The Design and Conduct of Sensory Experiments, edited by W. C. Stebbins. New York: Plenum, 1970, p. 363–400.
 29. Moody, D. B. Reaction time as an index of sensory function. In: Animal Psychophysics: The Design and Conduct of Sensory Experiments, edited by W. C. Stebbins. New York: Plenum, 1970, p. 277–302.
 30. Moody, D. B. Behavioral studies of noise‐induced hearing loss in primates: loudness recruitment. In: Advances in Oto‐Rhino‐Laryngology: Otophysiology, edited by M. Lawrence, J. E. Hawkins, Jr., and W. P. Work. Basel: Karger, 1973, vol. 20, p. 82–101.
 31. Moody, D. B., M. D. Beecher, and W. C. Stebbins. Behavioral methods in auditory research. In: Handbook of Auditory and Vestibular Research Methods, edited by C. A. Smith and J. A. Vernon. Springfield, IL: Thomas, 1976, p. 439–495.
 32. Morgan, C. L. An Introduction to Comparative Psychology. London: Scott, 1894.
 33. Mountcastle, V. B., R. H. LaMotte, and C. Giancarlo. Detection thresholds for stimuli in humans and monkeys: comparison with threshold events in mechanoreceptive afferent nerve fibers innervating the monkey hand. J. Neurophysiol. 35: 122–136, 1972.
 34. Pavlov, I. P. Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex. London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1927.
 35. Petersen, M. R., C. A. Prosen, D. B. Moody, and W. C. Stebbins. Operant conditioning in the guinea pig. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 27: 529–532, 1977.
 36. Pfingst, B. E., R. Hienz, J. Kimm, and J. M. Miller. Reaction‐time procedure for measurement of hearing. I. Supra‐threshold functions. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 57: 421–430, 1975.
 37. Poiley, S. M. Growth tables for 66 strains and stocks of laboratory animals. Lab. Anim. Sci. 22: 759–779, 1972.
 38. Pollack, J. D. Reaction time to different wave‐lengths at various luminances. Percept. Psychophys. 3: 17–24, 1968.
 39. Prosen, C. A., M. R. Petersen, D. B. Moody, and W. C. Stebbins. Auditory thresholds and kanamycin‐induced hearing loss in the guinea pig assessed by a positive reinforcement procedure. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 63: 559–566, 1978.
 40. Pugh, J. E., Jr., D. B. Moody, and D. J. Anderson. Electrophysiological studies of loudness recruitment. In: Electrocochleography, edited by R. J. Ruben, C. Eberling, and G. Salomon. Baltimore: Univ. Park, 1976, p. 471–478.
 41. Regan, D. Evoked Potentials in Psychology, Sensory Physiology, and Clinical Medicine. London: Chapman & Hall, 1972.
 42. Rescorla, R. A. Conditioned inhibition of fear. In: Fundamental Issues in Associative Learning, edited by N. J. Mackintosh and W. K. Honig. Halifax: Dalhousie Univ. Press, 1969, p. 65–89.
 43. Reynolds, G. S. Attention in the pigeon. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 4: 203–208, 1961.
 44. Rilling, M. Stimulus control and inhibitory processes. In: Handbook of Operant Behavior, edited by W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall, 1977, p. 432–480. (Century Psychol. Ser.)
 45. Rood, J. P. Ecological and behavioral comparisons of three genera of Argentine cavies. Anim. Behav. Monogr. 5: pt. 1, 1972.
 46. Rosenberger, P. B. Response‐adjusting stimulus intensity. In: Animal Psychophysics: The Design and Conduct of Sensory Experiments, edited by W. C. Stebbins. New York: Plenum, 1970, p. 161–184.
 47. Schwartz, B., and E. Gamzu. Pavlovian control of operant behavior: an analysis of autoshaping and its implications for operant conditioning. In: Handbook of Operant Behavior, edited by W. K. Honig and J. E. R. Staddon. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall, 1977, p. 52–97. (Century Psychol. Ser.)
 48. Scott, T. R., and W. L. Milligan. The psychophysical study of visual motion aftereffect rate in monkeys. In: Animal Psychophysics: The Design and Conduct of Sensory Experiments, edited by W. C. Stebbins. New York: Plenum, 1970, p. 341–361.
 49. Skinner, B. F. The Behavior of Organisms. New York: Appleton, 1938.
 50. Smith, J. Conditioned suppression as an animal psychophysical technique. In: Animal Psychophysics: The Design and Conduct of Sensory Experiments, edited by W. C. Stebbins. New York: Plenum, 1970, p. 125–159.
 51. Snapper, A. G., J. Z. Knapp, and H. K. Kushner. Mathematical description of schedules of reinforcement. In: Theory of Reinforcement Schedules, edited by W. N. Schoenfeld. New York: Appleton, 1970, p. 247–275.
 52. Snodgrass, J. G., R. D. Luce, and E. Galanter. Some experiments on simple and choice reaction time. J. Exp. Psychol. 74: 1–17, 1967.
 53. Stebbins, W. C. Auditory reaction time and the derivation of equal loudness contours for the monkey. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 9: 135–142, 1966.
 54. Stebbins, W. C. (editor). Animal Psychophysics: The Design and Conduct of Sensory Experiments. New York: Plenum, 1970.
 55. Stebbins, W. C. Studies of hearing and hearing loss in the monkey. In: Animal Psychophysics: The Design and Conduct of Sensory Experiments, edited by W. C. Stebbins. New York: Plenum, 1970, p. 41–66.
 56. Stebbins, W. C. Hearing of the anthropoid primates: a behavioral analysis. In: The Nervous System. Human Communication and its Disorders, edited by D. B. Tower and E. L. Eagles. New York: Raven, 1975, vol. 3, p. 113–123.
 57. Stevens, S. S. On the psychophysical law. Psychol. Rev. 64: 153–181, 1957.
 58. Talbot, W. H., I. Darian‐Smith, H. H. Kornhuber, and V. B. Mountcastle. The sense of flutter‐vibration: comparison of the human capacity with response patterns of mechanoreceptive afferents from the monkey hand. J. Neurophysiol. 31: 301–334, 1968.
 59. Towe, A. L., and R. W. Morse. Dependence of the response characteristics of somatosensory neurons on the form of their afferent input. Exp. Neurol. 6: 407–425, 1962.
 60. Watson, J. B. Behaviorism. New York: Norton, 1930.

Contact Editor

Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

Article Title: Sensory Function in Animals
 

How to Cite

W. C. Stebbins, C. H. Brown, M. R. Petersen. Sensory Function in Animals. Compr Physiol 2011, Supplement 3: Handbook of Physiology, The Nervous System, Sensory Processes: 123-148. First published in print 1984. doi: 10.1002/cphy.cp010304