Abstract
Three experiments were conducted to examine pigeons' postponement of signaled extinction periods (timeouts) from a schedule of food reinforcement when such responding neither decreased overall timeout frequency nor increased the overall frequency of food reinforcement. A discrete-trial procedure was used in which a response during the first 5 s of a trial postponed an otherwise immediate 60-s timeout to a later part of that same trial but had no effect on whether the timeout occurred. During time-in periods, responses on a second key produced food according to a random-interval 20-s schedule. In Experiment 1, the response-timeout interval was 45 s under postponement conditions and 0 s under extinction conditions (responses were ineffective in postponing timeouts). The percentage of trials with a response was consistently high when the timeout-postponement contingency was in effect and decreased to low levels when it was discontinued under extinction conditions. In Experiment 2, the response-timeout interval was also 45 s but postponement responses increased the duration of the timeout, which varied from 60 s to 105 s across conditions. Postponement responding was maintained, generally at high levels, at all timeout durations, despite sometimes large decreases in the overall frequency of food reinforcement. In Experiment 3, timeout duration was held constant at 60 s while the response-timeout interval was varied systematically across conditions from 0 s to 45 s. Postponement responding was maintained under all conditions in which the response-timeout interval exceeded 0 s (the timeout interval in the absence of a response). In some conditions of Experiment 3, which were designed to control for the immediacy of food reinforcement and food-correlated (time-in) stimuli, responding postponed timeout but the timeout was delayed whether a response occurred or not. Responding was maintained for 2 of 3 subjects, suggesting that behavior was negatively reinforced by timeout postponement rather than positively reinforced by the more immediate presentation of food or food-correlated (time-in) stimuli.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (427.4 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- APPEL J. B. Aversive aspects of a schedule of positive reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Jul;6:423–428. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-423. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- AZRIN N. H. Time-out from positive reinforcement. Science. 1961 Feb 10;133(3450):382–383. doi: 10.1126/science.133.3450.382. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Badia P., Coker C., Harsh J. Choice of higher density signalled shock over lower density unsignalled shock. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Jul;20(1):47–55. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-47. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- D'Andrea T. Avoidance of timeout from response-independent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 May;15(3):319–325. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-319. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dinsmoor J. A. Escape, avoidance, punishment: where do we stand? J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Jul;28(1):83–95. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.28-83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Galbicka G., Branch M. N. Stimulus-food relations and free-operant postponement of timeout from response-independent food presentation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Sep;40(2):153–163. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.40-153. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gardner E. T., Lewis P. Negative reinforcement with shock-frequency increase. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Jan;25(1):3–14. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.25-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gardner E. T., Lewis P. Parameters affecting the maintenance of negatively reinforced key pecking. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Sep;28(2):117–131. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.28-117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hackenberg T. D. Conjoint schedules of timeout deletion in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Sep;58(2):349–360. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.58-349. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hineline P. N. Negative reinforcement without shock reduction. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Nov;14(3):259–268. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.14-259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Leitenberg H. Is time-out from positive reinforcement an aversive event? A review of the experimental evidence. Psychol Bull. 1965 Dec;64(6):428–441. doi: 10.1037/h0022657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- SIDMAN M. Two temporal parameters of the maintenance of avoidance behavior by the white rat. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1953 Aug;46(4):253–261. doi: 10.1037/h0060730. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- THOMAS J. R. DISCRIMINATED TIME-OUT AVOIDANCE IN PIGEONS. J Exp Anal Behav. 1965 Sep;8:329–338. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1965.8-329. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- van Haaren F., Zarcone T. J. Effects of chlordiazepoxide and cocaine on concurrent food and avoidance-of-timeout schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 May;61(3):479–486. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-479. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]