Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1989 Sep;52(2):155–166. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.52-155

Operant conditioning of behavioral variability using a percentile reinforcement schedule.

A Machado 1
PMCID: PMC1338957  PMID: 2794841

Abstract

The present investigation developed and tested a new percentile reinforcement schedule suited to study pattern variability, whose main feature was the relative dissociation it provided between the variability requirement defining criterional responses and overall probability of reinforcement. In a discrete-trials procedure, pigeons produced patterns of four pecks on two response keys. If the pattern emitted on the current trial differed from the N preceding patterns, reinforcement was delivered with probability mu. The schedule continuously adjusted the criterion N such that the probability of a criterional response, estimated from the subject's recent behavior, was always constant. In these circumstances, the criterion corresponded to an invariant percentile in the distribution of recent responses. Using a between-subjects design, Experiment 1 manipulated the variability requirement--the percentile--while keeping overall reinforcement probability constant. The degree of variability varied directly with the requirement. In addition, an inverse relationship existed between the requirement and within-group variance. Experiment 2 manipulated probability of reinforcement while maintaining the variability requirement constant. No consistent relationship was found between variability and reinforcement probability. A tentative hypothesis was advanced ascribing the operant conditioning of behavioral variability to a process of probability-dependent selection.

Full text

PDF
155

Selected References

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

  1. ANTONITIS J. J. Response variability in the white rat during conditioning, extinction, and reconditioning. J Exp Psychol. 1951 Oct;42(4):273–281. doi: 10.1037/h0060407. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Blough D. S. The reinforcement of least-frequent interresponse times. J Exp Anal Behav. 1966 Sep;9(5):581–591. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1966.9-581. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Boren J. J., Moerschbaecher J. M., Whyte A. A. Variability of response location on fixed-ratio and fixed-interval schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Jul;30(1):63–67. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Eckerman D. A., Lanson R. N. Variability of response location for pigeons responding under continuous reinforcement, intermittent reinforcement, and extinction. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Jan;12(1):73–80. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-73. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Galbicka G. Differentiating the behavior of organisms. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Sep;50(2):343–354. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.50-343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Galbicka G., Platt J. R. Response-reinforcer contingency and spatially defined operants: testing an invariance property of phi. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 Jan;51(1):145–162. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.51-145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. HERRICK R. M., BROMBERGER R. A. LEVER DISPLACEMENT UNDER A VARIABLE RATIO SCHEDULE AND SUBSEQUENT EXTINCTION. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1965 Jun;59:392–398. doi: 10.1037/h0022063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. HERRNSTEIN R. J. Stereotypy and intermittent reinforcement. Science. 1961 Jun 30;133(3470):2067–2069. doi: 10.1126/science.133.3470.2067-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. MILLENSON J. R., HURWITZ H. M., NIXON W. L. Influence of reinforcement schedules on response duration. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961 Jul;4:243–250. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. MILLER G. A., FRICK F. C. Statistical behavioristics and sequences of responses. Psychol Rev. 1949 Nov;56(6):311–324. doi: 10.1037/h0060413. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Morris C. J. The operant conditioning of response variability: Free-operant versus discrete-response procedures. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 May;47(3):273–277. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.47-273. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Pryor K. W., Haag R., O'reilly J. The creative porpoise: training for novel behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Jul;12(4):653–661. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-653. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. STEBBINS W. C., LANSON R. N. Response latency as a function of reinforcement schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Jul;5:299–304. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Schoenfeld W. N., Harris A. H., Farmer J. Conditioning response variability. Psychol Rep. 1966 Oct;19(2):551–557. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1966.19.2.551. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Schwartz B. Development of complex, stereotyped behavior in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Mar;33(2):153–166. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-153. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Schwartz B. Failure to produce response variability with reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Mar;37(2):171–181. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-171. [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