Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “REINFORCEMENT”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 541 records · Page 30Linked to original sources
PubMed1972

The role of the response-reinforcer contingency in negative automaintenance.

When a response key is briefly illuminated before a grain reinforcer is presented, key pecking is reliably developed and maintained in pigeons, even if pecking prevents reinforcement (negative automaintenance). This experiment demonstrated that pigeons are sensitive to a negative response-reinforcer contingency, even though it does not eliminate responding. Within individual pigeons, two kinds of trials were compared: red key trials, in which reinforcement was negatively contingent on responding, and white key trials, in which reinforcement was unrelated to responding. Reinforcement frequency in non-contingent trials was yoked to the obtained reinforcement frequency in negatively contingent trials. All eight pigeons pecked substantially more on the non-contingent key than on the negative key, and preferred the non-contingent key to the negative key on occasional "choice" trials where both were presented together. When the stimuli correlated with the two conditions were reversed, the pigeons' behavior also shifted. These response differences are taken as evidence that pigeons are sensitive to the negative response-reinforcer contingency.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1972

Fixed-interval limited-hold avoidance with and without signalled reinforcement.

Rats trained to lever press on a fixed-interval limited-hold avoidance schedule maintained a pattern of responding similar to that maintained by fixed-interval limited-hold schedules of positive reinforcement. But this positively accelerated pattern of behavior was maintained only when the occurrence of reinforcement was signalled by the presentation of a brief flash of light. This result suggests that the discriminative function of the reinforcer in avoidance is less pronounced than the discriminative function of the reinforcer in escape or positive reinforcement. It also suggests that the distinction between positive reinforcement and avoidance is not superfluous. Although the schedule of reinforcement is an important variable in determining the pattern of behavior, other variables, such as the nature (i.e., stimulus presentation, termination, or omission) of the reinforcer, are also potent determinants of behavior.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1972

Reinforcement omission on temporal go-no-go schedules.

Either a partial blackout, or the blackout plus a "feeder flash", occurred in lieu of reinforcement on two procedures that produced opposite patterns of responding after reinforcement. Response rate was elevated after reinforcement omission on the procedure that produced a "pause-and-respond" pattern following reinforcement, but depressed after reinforcement omission on the procedure that produced a "respond-and-pause" pattern. The effect of blackout plus feeder flash was generally intermediate between the effects of blackout and the effects of reinforcement. These results are consistent with an interpretation of reinforcement omission effects in terms of the discriminative temporal control exerted by reinforcement and stimuli similar to it.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1973

Synthetic variable-interval schedules of reinforcement.

Three pigeons pecked for food on a synthetic variable-interval schedule of reinforcement that had two independent parts: a variable-interval schedule that arranged a distribution of interreinforcement intervals, and a device that randomly assigned each reinforcement to one of 10 classes of interresponse times. The frequencies of reinforcement for the 10 classes of interresponse times were systematically varied, while the overall frequency of reinforcement was held within a comparatively narrow range. The 10 classes extended either from 0.1 to 0.6 sec in 0.05-sec intervals, or from 1.0 to 6.0 sec in 0.5-sec intervals. In the former case, some control by reinforcement was obtained, but it was weak and no simple relationships were discernible. In the latter case, the relative frequency of an interresponse time was a generally increasing function of its relative frequency of reinforcement, and two simple controlling relationships were found. First, the function relating interresponse times per opportunity to reinforcements per opportunity was, over a restricted range, approximately linear with a slope of unity. Second, when all 10 classes of interresponse times were reinforced equally often, the relative frequency of an interresponse time approximately equalled the relative reciprocal of its length.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1973

Self-inhibiting effects of reinforcement.

The reinforcers produced by one response reduce the rate of other, concurrently reinforced responses. An analysis of the logical and empirical implications of the relation indicates that one reinforcer must have this effect on responses maintained by other reinforcers even when all reinforcers are produced by the same class of responses. A quantitative expression of the relation leads to a formulation, mathematically equivalent to Herrnstein's (1970), in which the rate of a reinforced response is a joint function of (1) an excitatory effect of the reinforcers produced by that class of responses, and (2) an inhibitory effect of the total reinforcers produced both by that class and by other classes of responses.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1974

Intercurrent and reinforced behavior under multiple spaced-responding schedules.

Lever pressing in rats was reinforced with food under a multiple spaced-responding schedule. A lever, food cup, and drinking tube were mounted in a running wheel so that lever pressing, running, and licking could be recorded. Running and licking had no scheduled consequences. Lever pressing was reinforced under a multiple schedule with three spaced-responding components and an extinction component. Each component was associated with a different auditory stimulus. Spaced-responding components reinforced only lever presses terminating interresponse times equal to or greater than 10, 20, or 60 sec, respectively. Rates of lever pressing, reinforcement, and licking all decreased as schedule parameter increased. Efficiency of spaced responding, as measured by reinforcements per response, also decreased. Rate of wheel running either increased or increased and then decreased with increasing schedule parameter. Individual running rates differed substantially. Neither licking nor running rate correlated with individual differences in efficiency. Analysis of conditional probabilities among the several response classes showed that, as the schedule requirement increased, the probability of running after a lever press increased and the probability of licking after a lever press decreased. After reinforcement, one subject always pressed the lever next. In the other subjects, the conditional probability of lever pressing, given reinforcement, increased while the probability of licking, given reinforcement, decreased with increasing schedule requirement. Results are discussed in relation to the concepts of schedule-induced and mediating behavior.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1974

Inhibitory stimulus control and the magnitude of delayed reinforcement.

The key pecking of pigeons was reinforced according to a variable-interval 1-min schedule during each of two successively presented stimuli. When the key was illuminated by a black line on a white background, reinforcement was delayed for 10 sec. When the key was illuminated by a plain white light, reinforcement was not delayed. For half of the subjects, the delayed reinforcer was 4.0-sec access to mixed grain, and for the remaining subjects it was 1.5-sec access. The immediate reinforcer was 1.5-sec access for all subjects. All subjects responded at a lower rate during the presentation of the black line; no between-group difference in terms of terminal response rate during the presentation of the line was found. However, subjects that received 4.0 sec of delayed reinforcement responded at a lower terminal rate during presentation of the plain white light than subjects that received 1.5 sec of delayed reinforcement. A subsequent generalization test along the line-orientation dimension produced flatter U-shaped gradients for subjects that received 4.0-sec of delayed reinforcement.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1974

Temporal control of periodic schedules: signal properties of reinforcement and blackout.

Pigeons were exposed to periodic food-reinforcement schedules in which intervals ended with equal probability in either reinforcement or brief blackout. The effects on the pattern of key pecking of sequential probability of reinforcement, interval duration, and time to reinforcement opportunity were investigated in three experiments. The major results were: (1) at short absolute interval durations, time to reinforcement opportunity determined both postreinforcement and postblackout pause (time to first key peck within an interval); (2) at long intervals, postblackout pause was consistently shorter than postreinforcement pause, even if both events signalled the same time to the next reinforcement opportunity (omission effect); (3) when reinforcement and blackout signalled different times to the next reinforcement opportunity, within the same experiment, there was some evidence for interactions analogous to behavioral contrast.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1975

Response additivity: effects of superimposed free reinforcement on a variable-interval baseline.

Three experiments examined the effects of superimposing free reinforcement (Free VI 30-sec) on behavior maintained by a response dependent mult VI 2-min VI 2-min schedule of reinforcement. Experiment I used pigeons as subjects, key pecking as the response, and colors of response key as the stimuli associated with the multiple-schedule components. When free reinforcement was added during only one component (Differential condition) a large and highly significant increase in response rate developed in this component. Adding free reinforcement during both components (Nondifferential condition) produced smaller and far less-consistent effects. An entirely different pattern of results was obtained in two subsequent experiments, where similar procedures and reinforcement conditions were used with rats as subjects and bar pressing as the response. In both Experiments II and III, response rates decreased to the stimulus associated with added free reinforcement in the Differential condition. These findings are interpreted as the result of interactions between behavior maintained by response-reinforcer contingencies and behavior maintained by stimulus-reinforcer contingencies. As such, they support the main assumption of an autoshaping theory of behavioral contrast, that additivity of responding generated by the two kinds of contingency can occur only in situations favorable to autoshaping.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1977

Line-orientation generalization following signalled-reinforcer training.

Three naive and three nonnaive pigeons key pecked for food on a multiple variable-interval 1-minute variable-interval 1-minute schedule with a black zero-degree vertical line on a white surround associated with one component and a black line shifted 30 degrees to the right (+30 degree) associated with the other component. Subsequently, a signalled-reinforcer procedure was introduced in the +30 degree component, i.e., whenever the reinforcer was available for the next response, the key changed to blank white. Following this training, the original unsignalled-reinforcer condition was re-instated. Line orientation generalization tests were given at the end of signalled-reinforcer training and after the second unsignalled-reinforcer condition. The signalled-reinforcer procedure reduced response rate in the +30-degree component in all subjects but facilitated responding during the zero-degree component (behavioral contrast) for two of the naive subjects only. However, average generalization gradients following signalled-reinforcer training indicated peak shift in two subjects and area shift in all five subjects that completed the experiment. There was no apparent relation between contrast and peak shift or degree of area shift. The data were interpreted as supporting the notion that the signalled-reinforcer procedure segments a variable-interval schedule into extinction and fixed ratio 1 segments.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1979

Percentage reinforcement and choice.

Pigeons responded on identical concurrent variable-interval schedules (choice phase), producing outcomes of either periodic reinforcement schedules always terminating in reinforcement (reliable schedule) or otherwise identical schedules providing reinforcement on only a percentage of instances (percentage reinforcement schedule). Comparisons of this type constituted two assessments of the generality of preference for percentage reinforcement reported by Kendall (1974). In a third set of conditions, a reliable schedule was pitted against a percentage reinforcement schedule in which the more negative outcome was a leaner schedule of reinforcement (rather than nonreinforcement, as in the other two conditions). In all three types of conditions, the schedule providing the higher rate of reinforcement was preferred. Results from a subsequent manipulation suggest that Kendall's contrasting results may have depended on the fact that the stimuli in his choice phase (unlit keys) were physically identical to the stimulus correlated with the nonchosen outcome in his outcome phase.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1981

The delay-reduction hypothesis of conditioned reinforcement and punishment: Observing behavior.

Pigeons responded in an observing-response procedure in which three fixed-interval components alternated. Pecking one response key produced food reinforcement according to a mixed schedule. Pecking the second (observing) key occasionally replaced the mixed-schedule stimulus with the stimulus correlated with the fixed-interval component then in effect. In Experiment 1, observing was best maintained by stimuli correlated with a reduction in mean time to reinforcement. That finding was consistent with the conditioned-reinforcement hypothesis of observing behavior. However, low rates of observing were also maintained by stimuli not representing delay reduction. Experiment 2 assessed the role of sensory reinforcement. It showed that response rate was higher when maintained by stimuli uncorrelated with reinforcement delay than when the stimuli were correlated with a delay increase. This latter result supports a symmetrical version of the conditioned-reinforcement hypothesis that requires suppression by stimuli correlated with an increase in time to reinforcement. The results were inconsistent with hypotheses stressing the reinforcing potency of uncertainty reduction.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1987

Response-reinforcer relations and the maintenance of behavior.

The effects on pigeons' key pecking of unsignaled delays of reinforcement and response-independent reinforcement were compared after either variable-interval or differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate baseline schedules. One 30-min session arranging delayed reinforcement and one 30-min session arranging response-independent reinforcement were conducted daily, 6 hr apart. A within-subject yoked-control procedure equated reinforcer frequency and distribution across the two sessions. Response rates usually were reduced more by response-independent than by delayed but response-contingent delivery of reinforcers. Under both schedules, response rates were lower when obtained delays were greater. These results bear upon methodological and conceptual issues regarding comparisons of contingencies that change the temporal response-reinforcer relations.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1988

Effects of magnitude of food reinforcement on free-operant response rates.

In Experiment 1 rats were trained to press a lever on a variable-ratio schedule of food presentation and were then exposed to progressively increasing magnitudes of food reinforcement. Response running rates (rates exclusive of the postreinforcement pause) were found to increase as a function of increasing reinforcement magnitudes. The effect of reinforcement magnitude on response rates inclusive of the postreinforcement pause, however, was less pronounced. Increases in the magnitude of reinforcement were also found to increase the length of the postreinforcement pause. Rats in Experiment 2 were trained to respond on a chained differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate variable-ratio schedule, and were exposed to increasing magnitudes of reinforcement as in Experiment 1. Response running rates increased in the variable-ratio component but decreased in the other component of the schedule. The results are discussed with reference to incentive accounts of reinforcement and the action of reinforcement on the response units generated by the operative contingencies.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1992

Human self-control and the density of reinforcement.

Choice responding in adult humans on a discrete-trial button-pressing task was examined as a function of amount, delay, and overall density (points per unit time) of reinforcement. Reinforcement consisted of points that were exchangeable for money. In T 0 conditions, an impulsive response produced 4 points immediately and a self-control response produced 10 points after a delay of 15 s. In T 15 conditions, a constant delay of 15 s was added to both prereinforcer delays. Postreinforcer delays, which consisted of 15 s added to the end of each impulsive trial, equated trial durations regardless of choice, and was manipulated in both T 0 and T 15 conditions. In all conditions, choice was predicted directly from the relative reinforcement densities of the alternatives. Self-control was observed in all conditions except T 0 without postreinforcer delays, where the impulsive choices produced the higher reinforcement density. These results support previous studies showing that choice is a direct function of the relative reinforcement densities when conditioned (point) reinforcers are used. In contrast, where responding produces intrinsic (immediately consumable) reinforcers, immediacy of reinforcement appears to account for preference when density does not.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1992

Effects of stimulus frequency and reinforcement variables on reaction time.

Pigeons pecked at one of two black forms, "+" or "O," either of which could appear alone on a white computer monitor screen. In baseline series of sessions, each form appeared equally often, and two pecks at it produced food reinforcement on 10% of trials. Test series varied the relative probability or duration of reinforcement or frequency of appearance of the targets. Peck reaction times, measured from target onset to the first peck, were found to vary as a function of reinforcement probability but not as a function of relative target frequency or of reinforcement duration. Reaction times to the two targets remained approximately equal as long as the probability of reinforcement, per trial, was equal for the targets, even if the relative frequency of the targets differed by as much as 19 to 1. The results address issues raised in visual search experiments and indicate that attentional priming is unimportant when targets are easy to detect. The results also suggest that equalizing reinforcement probability per trial for all targets removes differential reinforcement as an important variable. That reaction time was sensitive to the probability but not the duration of reinforcement raises interesting questions about the processes reflected in reaction time compared with rate as a response measure.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1992

Reinforcement magnitude and pausing on progressive-ratio schedules.

Rats responded under progressive-ratio schedules for sweetened milk reinforcers; each session ended when responding ceased for 10 min. Experiment 1 varied the concentration of milk and the duration of postreinforcement timeouts. Postreinforcement pausing increased as a positively accelerated function of the size of the ratio, and the rate of increase was reduced as a function of concentration and by timeouts of 10 s or longer. Experiment 2 varied reinforcement magnitude within sessions (number of dipper operations per reinforcer) in conjunction with stimuli correlated with the upcoming magnitude. In the absence of discriminative stimuli, pausing was longer following a large reinforcer than following a small one. Pauses were reduced by a stimulus signaling a large upcoming reinforcer, particularly at the highest ratios, and the animals tended to quit responding when the past reinforcer was large and the stimulus signaled that the next one would be small. Results of both experiments revealed parallels between responding under progressive-ratio schedules and other schedules containing ratio contingencies. Relationships between pausing and magnitude suggest that ratio pausing is under the joint control of inhibitory properties of the past reinforcer and excitatory properties of stimuli correlated with the upcoming reinforcer, rather than under the exclusive control of either factor alone.

Journal Article↗
PubMed1993

Short-term and long-term effects of reinforcers on choice.

The relation between molar and molecular aspects of time allocation was studied in pigeons on concurrent variable-time variable-time schedules of reinforcement. Fifteen-minute reinforcer-free periods were inserted in the middle of every third session. Generalized molar matching of time ratios to reinforcer ratios was observed during concurrent reinforcement. Contrary to melioration theory, preference was unchanged during the reinforcer-free periods as well as in extinction. In addition to this long-term effect of reinforcement, short-term effects were observed: Reinforcers increased the duration of the stays during which they were delivered but had little consistent effect either on the immediately following stay in the same schedule or on the immediately following stay in the alternative schedule. Thus, an orderly effect of reinforcer delivery on molecular aspects of time allocation was observed, but because of its short-term nature, this effect cannot account for the matching observed at the molar level.

Journal Article↗