Skip to main content
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1966 Sep;9(5):581–591. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1966.9-581

The reinforcement of least-frequent interresponse times1

Donald S Blough
PMCID: PMC1338218  PMID: 5964515

Abstract

A new schedule of reinforcement was used to maintain key-pecking by pigeons. The schedule reinforced only pecks terminating interresponse times which occurred least often relative to the exponential distribution of interresponse times to be expected from an ideal random generator. Two schedule parameters were varied: (1) the rate constant of the controlling exponential distribution and (2) the probability that a response would be reinforced, given that it met the interresponse-time contingency. Response rate changed quickly and markedly with changes in the rate constant; it changed only slightly with a fourfold change in the reinforcement probability. The schedule produced stable rates and high intra- and inter-subject reliability, yet interresponse time distributions were approximately exponential. Such local interresponse time variability in the context of good overall control suggests that the schedule may be used to generate stable, predictable, yet sensitive baseline rates. Implications for the measurement of rate are discussed.

Full text

PDF
581

Selected References

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

  1. 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]
  2. BLOUGH D. S., MILLWARD R. B. LEARNING: OPERANT CONDITIONING AND VERBAL LEARNING. Annu Rev Psychol. 1965;16:63–94. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ps.16.020165.000431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Blough D. S. Interresponse time as a function of continuous variables: a new method and some data. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Apr;6(2):237–246. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-237. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. CATANIA A. C. Independence of concurrent responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Apr;5:175–184. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. CLARK W. A., MOLNAR C. E. THE LINC: A DESCRIPTION OF THE LABORATORY INSTRUMENT COMPUTER. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1964 Jul 31;115:653–668. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. HERRNSTEIN R. J. SECONDARY REINFORCEMENT AND RATE OF PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 Jan;7:27–36. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1964.7-27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Mueller C. G. Theoretical Relationships Among Some Measures of Conditioning. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1950 Feb;36(2):123–130. doi: 10.1073/pnas.36.2.123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. WEISS B., LATIES V. G. REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE GENERATED BY AN ON-LINE DIGITAL COMPUTER. Science. 1965 Apr 30;148(3670):658–661. doi: 10.1126/science.148.3670.658. [DOI] [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