Abstract
Staddon and Simmelhag's proposal that behavior is produced by “principles of behavioral variation” instead of contingencies of reinforcement was tested in two experiments. In the first experiment pigeons were exposed to either a fixed-interval schedule of response-contingent reinforcement, an autoshaping schedule of stimulus-contingent reinforcement, or a fixed-time schedule of noncontingent reinforcement. Pigeons exposed to contingent reinforcement came to peck more rapidly than those exposed to noncontingent reinforcement. Staddon and Simmelhag's “principles of behavioral variation” included the proposal that patterns (interim and terminal) were a function of momentary probability of reinforcement. In the second experiment pigeons were exposed to either a fixed-time or a random-time schedule of noncontingent reinforcement. Pecking showed a constant frequency of occurrence over postfood time on the random-time schedule. Most behavior showed patterns on the fixed-time schedule that differed in overall shape (i.e., interim versus terminal) from those shown on the random-time schedule. It was concluded that both the momentary probability of reinforcement and postfood time can affect patterning.
Keywords: response-reinforcer contingency, stimulus-reinforcer contingency, momentary probability of reinforcement, postfood time, interim, terminal, random-time schedules of reinforcement, pecking, pigeons
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Anderson M. C., Shettleworth S. J. Behavioral adaptation to fixed-interval and fixed-time food delivery in golden hamsters. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Jan;27(1):33–49. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.27-33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brown P. L., Jenkins H. M. Auto-shaping of the pigeon's key-peck. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jan;11(1):1–8. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gamzu E., Williams D. R. Classical conditioning of a complex skeletal response. Science. 1971 Mar 5;171(3974):923–925. doi: 10.1126/science.171.3974.923. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lowe C. F., Harzem P. Species differences in temporal control of behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Nov;28(3):189–201. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.28-189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Neuringer A. J. Superstitious key pecking after three peck-produced reinforcements. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Mar;13(2):127–134. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-127. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Perkins C. C., Beavers W. O., Hancock R. A., Hemmendinger P. C., Hemmendinger D., Ricci J. A. Some variables affecting rate of key pecking during response-independent procedures (autoshaping). J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Jul;24(1):59–72. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.24-59. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Williams D. R., Williams H. Auto-maintenance in the pigeon: sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Jul;12(4):511–520. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-511. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zeiler M. D. Fixed and variable schedules of response-independent reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jul;11(4):405–414. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-405. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]