Abstract
Pigeons were studied on a three-component multiple schedule where all reinforcement was independent of responding. Two components were cued by different keylights and were associated with different rates of reinforcement. The third was always a no-key period associated with extinction. After a few sessions, pecking was elicited by the keylights signalling the reinforcement and continued to be maintained indefinitely. The duration and sequence of the three components were varied to determine if the primary controlling variable was differences in the overall probability of reinforcement, or if it was the immediate change in reinforcement signalled by the onset and/or offset of the stimulus. Both variables were found to control behavior. When 30-sec components were used, the primary controlling variable was the overall probability of reinforcement, but when 3-min components were used, overall probability had little effect. Control by local changes in reinforcement also occurred, although the type of local control varied both across subjects and experimental conditions. Some behaviors were controlled more by the change in reinforcement signalled by the onset of the stimulus, while others were controlled more by the change signalled by the offset of the stimulus.
Keywords: elicited responding, response-independent reinforcement, behavioral contrast, multiple schedules, sequential effects, autoshaping, key pecks, pigeons
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Buck S. L., Rothstein B., Williams B. A. A re-examination of local contrast in multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Nov;24(3):291–301. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.24-291. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- Menlove R. L. Local patterns of responding maintained by concurrent and multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 May;23(3):309–337. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.23-309. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- PLISKOFF S. S. RATE-CHANGE EFFECTS WITH EQUAL POTENTIAL REINFORCEMENTS DURING THE "WARNING" STIMULUS. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Oct;6:557–562. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-557. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- PLISKOFF S. Rate-change effects during a pre-schedule-change stimulus. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961 Oct;4:383–386. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rescorla R. A. Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychol Rev. 1967 Jan;74(1):71–80. doi: 10.1037/h0024109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rescorla R. A. Probability of shock in the presence and absence of CS in fear conditioning. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1968 Aug;66(1):1–5. doi: 10.1037/h0025984. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Shimp C. P., Wheatley K. L. Matching to relative reinforcement frequency in multiple schedules with a short component duration. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Mar;15(2):205–210. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Silberberg A., Schrot J. A yoked-chamber comparison of concurrent and multiple schedules: the relationship between component duration and responding. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jul;22(1):21–30. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Todorov J. C. Component duration and relative response rates in multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Jan;17(1):45–49. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.17-45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wilton R. N., Gay R. A. Behavioral contrast in one component of a multiple schedule as a function of the reinforcement conditions operating in the following component. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Mar;12(2):239–246. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-239. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]