Skip to main content
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1996 May;65(3):549–560. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1996.65-549

Response-independent food delivery and behavioral resistance to change

David N Harper
PMCID: PMC1349951  PMID: 16812808

Abstract

Response-independent food was delivered during a dark-key phase between two multiple-schedule components to explore its disruptive effects on responding. Responding in components was maintained by separate variable-interval 120-s schedules, with a 2-s reinforcer in Component 1 and a 6-s reinforcer in Component 2. Across conditions the rate and duration of response-independent food presentations were manipulated. The results showed that response rates in both components decreased as a function of the duration and the rate of response-independent food presentations; moreover, the decrease in response rate relative to the baseline level was larger in Component 1 than in Component 2. These findings were consistent with expectations from behavioral momentum theory, which predicts that if equal disruption (response-independent food in this case) is applied to responding in two components, then the ratio of response-rate change in Component 1 versus Component 2 should remain constant, irrespective of the magnitude of that disruption.

Keywords: behavioral momentum, resistance to change, multiple schedules, pigeons

Full text

PDF
550

Selected References

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

  1. Bouzas A. The relative law of effect: effects of shock intensity on response strength in multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Nov;30(3):307–314. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-307. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Fath S. J., Fields L., Malott M. K., Grossett D. Response rate, latency, and resistance to change. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Mar;39(2):267–274. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.39-267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Harper D. N., McLean A. P. Resistance to change and the law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 May;57(3):317–337. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Nevin J. A. An integrative model for the study of behavioral momentum. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 May;57(3):301–316. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Nevin J. A., Mandell C., Atak J. R. The analysis of behavioral momentum. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Jan;39(1):49–59. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.39-49. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Nevin J. A. On the form of the relation between response rates in a multiple schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Mar;21(2):237–248. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-237. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Nevin J. A., Tota M. E., Torquato R. D., Shull R. L. Alternative reinforcement increases resistance to change: Pavlovian or operant contingencies? J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 May;53(3):359–379. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1990.53-359. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Pliskoff S. S., Shull R. L., Gollub L. R. The relation between response rates and reinforcement rates in a multiple schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 May;11(3):271–284. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-271. [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