Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 2001 Mar;75(2):165–182. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.75-165

Effects of signaled versus unsignaled delay of reinforcement on choice.

M A McDevitt 1, B A Williams 1
PMCID: PMC1284813  PMID: 11394485

Abstract

Pigeons chose between 5-s and 15-s delay-of-reinforcement alternatives. The first key peck to satisfy the choice schedule began a delay timer, and food was delivered at the end of the interval. Key pecks during the delay interval were measured, but had no scheduled effect. In Experiment 1, signal conditions and choice schedules were varied across conditions. During unsignaled conditions, no stimulus change signaled the beginning of a delay interval. During differential and nondifferential signal conditions, offset of the choice stimuli and onset of a delay stimulus signaled the beginning of a delay interval. During differential signal conditions, different stimuli were correlated with the 5-s and 15-s delays, whereas the same stimulus appeared during both delay durations during nondifferential signal conditions. Pigeons showed similar, extreme levels of preference for the 5-s delay alternative during unsignaled and differentially signaled conditions. Preference levels were reliably lower with nondifferential signals. Experiment 2 assessed preference with two pairs of unsignaled delays in which the ratio of delays was held constant but the absolute duration was increased fourfold. No effect of absolute duration was found. The results highlight the importance of delayed primary reinforcement effects and challenge models of choice that focus solely on conditioned reinforcement.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (409.6 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. CATANIA A. C. Concurrent performances: a baseline for the study of reinforcement magnitude. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Apr;6:299–300. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Catania A. C. Self-inhibiting effects of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 May;19(3):517–526. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-517. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Chung S. H., Herrnstein R. J. Choice and delay of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967 Jan;10(1):67–74. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-67. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Critchfield T. S., Lattal K. A. Acquisition of a spatially defined operant with delayed reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Mar;59(2):373–387. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.59-373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. FLESHLER M., HOFFMAN H. S. A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Oct;5:529–530. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fantino E. Choice and rate of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Sep;12(5):723–730. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-723. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Gentry G. D., Marr M. J. Choice and reinforcement delay. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Jan;33(1):27–37. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Grace R. C. A contextual model of concurrent-chains choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 Jan;61(1):113–129. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Herrnstein R. J. On the law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Mar;13(2):243–266. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lattal K. A., Gleeson S. Response acquisition with delayed reinforcement. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1990 Jan;16(1):27–39. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Lattal K. A., Metzger B. Response acquisition by Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens) with delayed visual reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 Jan;61(1):35–44. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Royalty P., Williams B. A., Fantino E. Effects of delayed conditioned reinforcement in chain schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 Jan;47(1):41–56. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.47-41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Sizemore O. J., Lattal K. A. Dependency, temporal contiguity, and response-independent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Jan;27(1):119–125. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.27-119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Squires N., Fantino E. A model for choice in simple concurrent and concurrent-chains schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Jan;15(1):27–38. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Stubbs D. A., Pliskoff S. S. Concurrent responding with fixed relative rate of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Nov;12(6):887–895. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-887. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Williams B. A., Fantino E. Effects on choice of reinforcement delay and conditioned reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Jan;29(1):77–86. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.29-77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Williams B. A. The effects of unsignalled delayed reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Nov;26(3):441–449. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-441. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Young J. S. Discrete-trial choice in pigeons: Effects of reinforcer magnitude. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 Jan;35(1):23–29. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.35-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES