Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1982 May;37(3):441–453. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-441

Incentive processes and the peak shift

Stanley J Weiss, Robert J Dacanay
PMCID: PMC1333158  PMID: 16812277

Abstract

Intradimensional operant discrimination schedules were employed, which eliminated the covariation of response and reinforcement rates that are found on most operant baselines. In Phase 1, one keylight (S1) controlled an increase in pigeons' treadle pressing, relative to another keylight (S2), while being correlated with a decrease in frequency of reinforcement. In Phase 2 both treadle pressing and reinforcement increased in the presence of one keylight, relative to the second. In Phase 1 the relatively flat treadle-press generalization gradients peaked at S1, whereas the peaks of those in Phase 2 were shifted from S1 in a direction away from S2. It was postulated that these positive and negative stimulus-reinforcement contingencies influence the likelihood of obtaining peak shift through the operation of a classically conditioned “central motive state.” How response-reinforcement and stimulus-reinforcement contingencies might contribute to the development of inhibitory effects of S2 is discussed. Autoshaped key pecking also was produced by these procedures. During manipulations of stimuli, the gradients obtained for autoshaped key pecking were narrow and sharply peaked at the food-correlated stimulus (S2) in Phase 1. This failure to obtain peak shift for an elicited response suggests a difference in discriminative processes operating in classical and instrumental learning.

Keywords: intradimensional discrimination training, peak shift, incentive, stimulus control, two-process theory, autoshaping, treadle pressing, pigeons

Full text

PDF
441

Selected References

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

  1. Bushnell M. C., Weiss S. J. An investigation of peak shift and behavioral contrast for autoshaped and operant behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Jan;33(1):101–118. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Emurian H. H., Weiss S. J. Compounding discriminative stimuli controlling free-operant avoidance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Mar;17(2):249–256. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.17-249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. GRAY J. A. STIMULUS INTENSITY DYNAMISM. Psychol Bull. 1965 Mar;63:180–196. doi: 10.1037/h0021700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gamzu E., Schwartz B. The maintenance of key pecking by stimulus-contingent and response-independent food presentation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Jan;19(1):65–72. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gutman A. Positive contrast, negative induction, and inhibitory stimulus control in the rat. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Mar;27(2):219–233. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.27-219. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. HANSON H. M. Effects of discrimination training on stimulus generalization. J Exp Psychol. 1959 Nov;58:321–334. doi: 10.1037/h0042606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hamilton B. E., Silberberg A. Contrast and autoshaping in multiple schedules varying reinforcer rate and duration. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Jul;30(1):107–122. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hearst E. Contrast and stimulus generalization following prolonged discrimination training. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 May;15(3):355–363. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-355. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hearst E. Discrimination learning as the summation of excitation and inhibition. Science. 1968 Dec 13;162(3859):1303–1306. doi: 10.1126/science.162.3859.1303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Huff R. C., Sherman J. E., Cohn M. Some effects of response-independent reinforcement on auditory generalization gradients. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Jan;23(1):81–86. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.23-81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Liu S. S. Differential conditioning and stimulus generalization of the rabbits nictitating membrane response. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1971 Oct;77(1):136–142. doi: 10.1037/h0031587. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Moore C. H., Crum B. C. Weight reduction in a chronic schizophrenic by means of operant conditioning procedures: a case study. Behav Res Ther. 1969 Feb;7(1):129–131. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(69)90057-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Nallan G. B., McCoy D. F., Pace G. M., Welch R. Generalization gradients following differential intradimensional autoshaping. Percept Mot Skills. 1979 Apr;48(2):671–677. doi: 10.2466/pms.1979.48.2.671. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Rescorla R. A., Solomon R. L. Two-process learning theory: Relationships between Pavlovian conditioning and instrumental learning. Psychol Rev. 1967 May;74(3):151–182. doi: 10.1037/h0024475. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Terrace H. S. Discrimination learning, the peak shift, and behavioral contrast. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Nov;11(6):727–741. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-727. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Weisman R. G., Palmer J. A. Factors influencing inhibitory stimulus control: discrimination training and prior non-differential reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Mar;12(2):229–237. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Weisman R. G., Ramsden M. Discrimination of a response-independent component in a multiple schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Jan;19(1):55–64. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Weiss S. J. Discriminated response and incentive processes in operant conditioning: a two-factor model of stimulus control. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Nov;30(3):361–381. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-361. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Weiss S. J. Discrimination training and stimulus compounding: consideration of non-reinforcement and response differentiation consequences of S. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 May;15(3):387–402. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-387. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Wessells M. G. Errorless discrimination, autoshaping, and conditioned inhibition. Science. 1973 Nov 30;182(4115):941–943. doi: 10.1126/science.182.4115.941. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Yarczower M., Gollub L. R., Dickson J. F. Some effects of discriminative training with equated frequency of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jul;11(4):415–423. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-415. [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