Abstract
Two experiments studied the effects of reinforcement schedules on generalization gradients. In Exp. 1, after pigeons' responding to a vertical line was reinforced, the pigeons were tested with 10 lines differing in orientation. Reconditioning and the redetermination of generalization gradients were repeated from 8 to 11 times with the schedule of reinforcement varied in the reconditioning phase. Stable gradients could not be observed because the successive reconditionings and tests steepened the gradients and reduced responding. Experiment 2 over-came these effects by first training the birds to respond to all of the stimuli. Then, brief periods of reinforced responding to the stimulus correlated with reinforcement alternated with the presentation of the 10 lines in extinction. The development of stimulus control was studied eight times with each bird, twice with each of four schedules of reinforcement. Gradients were similar each time a schedule was imposed; the degree of control by the stimulus correlated with reinforcement varied with particular schedules. Behavioral contrast occurred when periods of reinforcement and extinction alternated and was more durable with fixed-interval, variable-interval, and variable-ratio schedules than with fixed-ratio or differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedules.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Blough D. S. The shape of some wavelength generalization gradients. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961 Jan;4(1):31–40. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Boren J. J., Devine D. D. The repeated acquisition of behavioral chains. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Nov;11(6):651–660. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-651. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- FERSTER C. B. Intermittent reinforcement of matching to sample in the pigeon. J Exp Anal Behav. 1960 Jul;3:259–272. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1960.3-259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- GUTTMAN N., KALISH H. I. Discriminability and stimulus generalization. J Exp Psychol. 1956 Jan;51(1):79–88. doi: 10.1037/h0046219. [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]
- MARX M. H., BROWNSTEIN A. J. Effects of incentive magnitude on running speeds without competing responses in acquisition and extinction. J Exp Psychol. 1963 Feb;65:182–189. doi: 10.1037/h0043255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- REYNOLDS G. S., CATANIA A. C. Behavioral contrast with fixed interval and low-rate reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961 Oct;4:387–391. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-387. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- REYNOLDS G. S. Contrast, generalization, and the process of discrimination. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961 Oct;4:289–294. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-289. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sidman M., Rosenberger P. B. Several methods for teaching serial position sequences to monkeys. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967 Sep;10(5):467–478. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-467. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zeiler M. D. Stimulus control with fixed-ratio reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Mar;11(2):107–115. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]