Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 2003 Mar;79(2):193–206. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2003.79-193

Effects of alternative reinforcement on human behavior: the source does matter.

Gregory J Madden 1, Michael Perone 1
PMCID: PMC1284929  PMID: 12822686

Abstract

Competing theories regarding the effects of delivering periodic response-independent reinforcement (more accurately, response-independent points exchanged for money) on a baseline rate of behavior were evaluated in human subjects. Contiguity theory holds that these events decrease target responding because incompatible behavior is adventitiously strengthened when the point deliveries follow target behavior closely in time. Matching theory holds that response-independent points, like any other alternative reinforcer, should reduce target responding. On this view, temporal contiguity between target responding and response-independent point delivery is unimportant. In our experiment, four different responses (moving a joystick in four different directions) were reinforced with points exchangeable for money according to four independent variable-interval schedules. Different schedules of point delivery were then superimposed on these baselines. When all superimposed point deliveries occurred immediately after one of the four responses (the target response), time allocated to target responding increased. When the superimposed point deliveries could be delivered at any time, time allocated to target responding declined and other behavior increased. When superimposed points could never immediately follow target responses, time allocated to target responding decreased further and other behavior or pausing predominated. The findings underscore the contribution of temporal contiguity in the effects of response-independent deliveries of food, money, points, etc.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (174.8 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Alleman H. D., Zeiler M. D. Patterning with fixed-time schedules of response-independent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jul;22(1):135–141. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Baum W. M. Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Sep;32(2):269–281. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.32-269. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Britton L. N., Carr J. E., Kellum K. K., Dozier C. L., Weil T. M. A variation of noncontingent reinforcement in the treatment of aberrant behavior. Res Dev Disabil. 2000 Nov-Dec;21(6):425–435. doi: 10.1016/s0891-4222(00)00056-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Burgess I. S., Wearden J. H. Superimposition of response-independent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1986 Jan;45(1):75–82. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1986.45-75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Carr J. E., Bailey J. S., Ecott C. L., Lucker K. D., Weil T. M. On the effects of noncontingent delivery of differing magnitudes of reinforcement. J Appl Behav Anal. 1998 Fall;31(3):313–321. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1998.31-313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Edwards D. D., Peek V., Wolfe F. Independently delivered food decelerates fixed-ratio rates. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Nov;14(3):301–307. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.14-301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. 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]
  8. Fischer S. M., Iwata B. A., Mazaleski J. L. Noncontingent delivery of arbitrary reinforcers as treatment for self-injurious behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Summer;30(2):239–249. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-239. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hagopian L. P., Fisher W. W., Legacy S. M. Schedule effects of noncontingent reinforcement on attention-maintained destructive behavior in identical quadruplets. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Summer;27(2):317–325. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. 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]
  11. Imam A. A., Lattal K. A. Effects of alternative reinforcement sources: A reevaluation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Sep;50(2):261–271. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.50-261. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Killeen P. R. Superstition: a matter of bias, not detectability. Science. 1978 Jan 6;199(4324):88–90. doi: 10.1126/science.199.4324.88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lachter G. D., Cole B. K., Schoenfeld W. N. Response rate under varying frequency of non-contingent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Mar;15(2):233–236. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-233. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Lachter G. D. Some temporal parameters of non-contingent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Sep;16(2):207–217. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.16-207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lalli J. S., Casey S. D., Kates K. Noncontingent reinforcement as treatment for severe problem behavior: some procedural variations. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Spring;30(1):127–137. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-127. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Lattal K. A., Abreu-Rodrigues J. Response-independent events in the behavior stream. J Exp Anal Behav. 1997 Nov;68(3):375–398. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1997.68-375. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Lattal K. A., Boyer S. S. Alternative reinforcement effects on fixed-interval performance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Nov;34(3):285–296. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.34-285. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Lattal K. A., Bryan A. J. Effects of concurrent response-independent reinforcement on fixed-interval schedule performance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Nov;26(3):495–504. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-495. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Lattal K. A. Combinations of response-reinforcer dependence and independence. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Sep;22(2):357–362. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-357. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Lattal K. A. Reponse-reinforcer independence and conventional extinction after fixed-interval and variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Jul;18(1):133–140. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.18-133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Mace F. C., Lalli J. S. Linking descriptive and experimental analyses in the treatment of bizarre speech. J Appl Behav Anal. 1991 Fall;24(3):553–562. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-553. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Madden G., Perone M. Human Sensitivity To Concurrent Schedules Of Reinforcement: Effects Of Observing Schedule-correlated Stimuli. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999 May;71(3):303–318. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1999.71-303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Marcus B. A., Vollmer T. R. Effects of differential negative reinforcement on disruption and compliance. J Appl Behav Anal. 1995 Summer;28(2):229–230. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1995.28-229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. McDowell J. J. The importance of Herrnstein's mathematical statement of the law of effect for behavior therapy. Am Psychol. 1982 Jul;37(7):771–779. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.37.7.771. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Rachlin H., Baum W. M. Effects of alternative reinforcement: does the source matter? J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Sep;18(2):231–241. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.18-231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Timberlake W., Lucas G. A. The basis of superstitious behavior: chance contingency, stimulus substitution, or appetitive behavior? J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Nov;44(3):279–299. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.44-279. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Vollmer T. R., Hackenberg T. D. Reinforcement contingencies and social reinforcement: some reciprocal relations between basic and applied research. J Appl Behav Anal. 2001 Summer;34(2):241–253. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2001.34-241. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Vollmer T. R., Iwata B. A., Zarcone J. R., Smith R. G., Mazaleski J. L. The role of attention in the treatment of attention-maintained self-injurious behavior: noncontingent reinforcement and differential reinforcement of other behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1993 Spring;26(1):9–21. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1993.26-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Vollmer T. R., Marcus B. A., Ringdahl J. E., Roane H. S. Progressing from brief assessments to extended experimental analyses in the evaluation of aberrant behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1995 Winter;28(4):561–576. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1995.28-561. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Vollmer T. R., Progar P. R., Lalli J. S., Van Camp C. M., Sierp B. J., Wright C. S., Nastasi J., Eisenschink K. J. Fixed-time schedules attenuate extinction-induced phenomena in the treatment of severe aberrant behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1998 Winter;31(4):529–542. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1998.31-529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Vollmer T. R., Ringdahl J. E., Roane H. S., Marcus B. A. Negative side effects of noncontingent reinforcement. J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Spring;30(1):161–164. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Zeiler M. D. Eliminating behavior with reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Nov;16(3):401–405. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.16-401. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Zeiler M. D. Positive reinforcement and the elimination of reinforced responses. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Jul;26(1):37–44. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-37. [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