Abstract
Pigeons responded in an observing-response procedure in which three fixed-interval components alternated. Pecking one response key produced food reinforcement according to a mixed schedule. Pecking the second (observing) key occasionally replaced the mixed-schedule stimulus with the stimulus correlated with the fixed-interval component then in effect. In Experiment 1, observing was best maintained by stimuli correlated with a reduction in mean time to reinforcement. That finding was consistent with the conditioned-reinforcement hypothesis of observing behavior. However, low rates of observing were also maintained by stimuli not representing delay reduction. Experiment 2 assessed the role of sensory reinforcement. It showed that response rate was higher when maintained by stimuli uncorrelated with reinforcement delay than when the stimuli were correlated with a delay increase. This latter result supports a symmetrical version of the conditioned-reinforcement hypothesis that requires suppression by stimuli correlated with an increase in time to reinforcement. The results were inconsistent with hypotheses stressing the reinforcing potency of uncertainty reduction.
Keywords: conditioned reinforcement, conditioned punishment, delay-reduction hypothesis, observing behavior, multiple schedules, mixed schedules, sensory reinforcement, key peck, pigeons
Full text
PDF![93](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/aa727b0c22fb/jeabehav00078-0095.png)
![94](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/7fb46b66b201/jeabehav00078-0096.png)
![95](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/015ac7905200/jeabehav00078-0097.png)
![96](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/959426aeaa66/jeabehav00078-0098.png)
![97](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/70d81f6f20dc/jeabehav00078-0099.png)
![98](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/73c51dae9335/jeabehav00078-0100.png)
![99](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/638914fe8591/jeabehav00078-0101.png)
![100](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/c3733a63ee24/jeabehav00078-0102.png)
![101](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/c0e21368e87e/jeabehav00078-0103.png)
![102](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/557c3bb7ba3f/jeabehav00078-0104.png)
![103](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/42367a052b32/jeabehav00078-0105.png)
![104](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/ce0d840d22ca/jeabehav00078-0106.png)
![105](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/7da8943ae7bb/jeabehav00078-0107.png)
![106](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/df4272458b46/jeabehav00078-0108.png)
![107](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/08c86c42109d/jeabehav00078-0109.png)
![108](https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4454/1333025/74157d71d8fd/jeabehav00078-0110.png)
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Auge R. J. Effects of stimulus duration on observing behavior maintained by differential reinforcement magnitude. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Nov;20(3):429–438. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-429. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dinsmoor J. A., Browne M. P., Lawrence C. E. A test of the negative discriminative stimulus as a reinforcer of observing. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Jul;18(1):79–85. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.18-79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- Green L., Rachlin H. Pigeons' preferences for stimulus information: effects of amount of information. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Mar;27(2):255–263. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.27-255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hursh S. R., Fantino E. Relative delay of reinforcement and choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 May;19(3):437–450. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-437. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McMillan J. C. Average uncertainty as a determinant of observing behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Sep;22(2):401–408. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-401. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mulvaney D. E., Dinsmoor J. A., Jwaideh A. R., Hughes L. H. Punishment of observing by the negative discriminative stimulus. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jan;21(1):37–44. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- Wilton R. N., Clements R. O. The role of information in the emission of observing responses: a test of two hypotheses. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Sep;16(2):161–166. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.16-161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]