Abstract
Five pigeons were given single-stimulus training on an 8-sec differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule followed by steady-state generalization training using 12 wavelength stimuli. Three birds had a high percentage of reinforced responses on the training schedule and flat generalization gradients of total responses. The birds with fewer reinforced responses had much steeper generalization gradients. Generalization gradients plotted as a function of both stimulus wavelength and interresponse time showed that for most birds, stimulus control was restricted to responses with long interresponse times. Responses with very short interresponse times were not under stimulus control and there was some evidence of inhibitory control of short interresponse times. Interresponse-times-per-opportunity functions, plotted as a function of stimulus wavelength, showed that stimulus wavelength controlled the temporal distribution of responses, rather than the overall rate of response. The data indicate that the differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule generates several response categories that are controlled in different ways by wavelength and time-correlated stimuli, and that averaging responses regardless of interresponse-time length obscures this control.
Keywords: differential reinforcement of low rate, stimulus control, interresponse time, response rate, inhibitory control, key peck, pigeon
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- ANGER D. The dependence of interresponse times upon the relative reinforcement of different interresponse times. J Exp Psychol. 1956 Sep;52(3):145–161. doi: 10.1037/h0041255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Blough P. M., Blough D. S. The distribution of interresponse times in the pigeon during variable-interval reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jan;11(1):23–27. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- HABER A., KALISH H. I. PREDICTION OF DISCRIMINATION FROM GENERALIZATION AFTER VARIATIONS IN SCHEDULE OF REINFORCEMENT. Science. 1963 Oct 18;142(3590):412–413. doi: 10.1126/science.142.3590.412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- HEARST E., KORESKO M. B., POPPEN R. STIMULUS GENERALIZATION AND THE RESPONSE-REINFORCEMENT CONTINGENCY. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 Sep;7:369–380. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1964.7-369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hearst E., Besley S., Farthing G. W. Inhibition and the stimulus control of operant behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Nov;14(3 Pt 2 Suppl):373–409. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.14-s373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Laties V. G., Weiss B., Weiss A. B. Further observations on overt "mediating" behavior and the discrimination of time. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Jan;12(1):43–57. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-43. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- MIGLER B. EFFECTS OF AVERAGING DATA DURING STIMULUS GENERALIZATION. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 Jul;7:303–307. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1964.7-303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Migler B., Millenson J. R. Analysis of response rates during stimulus generalization. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Jan;12(1):81–87. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schwartz B., Williams D. R. Discrete-trials spaced responding in the pigeon: the dependence of efficient performance on the availability of a stimulus for collateral pecking. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Sep;16(2):155–160. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.16-155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zeiler M. D. Repeated measurements of reinforcement effects on gradients of stimulus control. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 May;12(3):451–461. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-451. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zuriff G. E. Collateral responding during differential reinforcement of low rates. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Nov;12(6):971–976. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-971. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]