A Further Study of Weak-Light Reinforcement and Response Facilitation

Nash, Franklin A.; Crowder, William F.

doi:10.1080/00223980.1960.9916445

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lever would intercept some of the activity, blink the light, and thus sustain more activity. Nash and Crowder (1960) argued for the facilitation position, but their data are based upon nonsignificant t tests between small groups. The position of Crowder, Wilkes, and Crowder (1960) is that responses in extinction are free from facilitation effects since the test light is gone, and that an adequate test for reinforcement should be based upon responses in extinction.…”

Section: Theories Of Light-rein]'orxed Bar Pressingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some effects of light upon the behavior of rodents.

Lockard

1963

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Topics discussed are light aversion, light reinforcement, self-regulated exposure to light, activity and activity rhythms affected by light, and physiological changes dependent upon light. It is argued that the effects of light are manifold and persistent, and thus cut across usual research categories; that different experimental procedures may not measure entirely separate light-controlled phenomena; and that theories of lightcontrolled behavior might profit from considering a wider scope of data whose common denominator is light.Almost 3 decades ago, Turner (1935) remarked upon "the use of illumination as a motivating factor." Subsequent research increasingly characterized the rat as light aversive, and many still regard light as a stimulus with motivational properties that become increasingly negative as intensity increases. But in 19S3 both Girdner and Henderson showed that dim light produced by bar pressing had positive reinforcing properties. This positive effect was identified with stimulus change and exploration, not with light per se. Hence research tended to persist within the categories of light aversion and stimulus change without being united by virtue of their common continuum.A third category of research concerned with light-controlled behavior has recently appeared which rejects dichotomous views and strives to show how behavior is a continuous function of light intensity. While the light aversion studies used a single lever to turn off the author is indebted to the National Science Foundation whose financial support in the form of a predoctoral fellowship made possible the preparation of this report.2 Now with the University of Washington.

show abstract

Section: Theories Of Light-rein]'orxed Bar Pressingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some effects of light upon the behavior of rodents.

Lockard

1963

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The finding that the experimental groups responded more than the control group in the extinction period indicates that learning had occurred in the experimental period, so providing evidence against the facilitation hypothesis (Nash & Crowder, 1960), which states that stimulation merely increases activity. It might have been expected that the flicker group should have responded more than the light group in the extinction period, and indeed there was a slight trend in this direction; however, as the effectiveness of both reinforcers was decreasing over sessions, any differences between them may have been minimized.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 50%

Bar pressing in the rat as a function of variable visual stimulation

Williams

Lowe

1967

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Lockard suggests that in acquisition the hypothesis is ruled out by the results of Kling, Horowitz, and Delhagen (1956) who tried to control for facilitation effects by using a yokedcontrol technique. However Nash and Crowder (1960) utilizing a yoked-control technique showed that, although differences between experimental (light onset) and yoked controls were significant (p < .001) in an onset session, these differences disappeared under extinction (p = .50), suggesting that acquisition had not occurred. This experiment, which Lockard states used small groups, employed 29 experimental animals and 14 yoked controls.…”

Section: Theories Of Light-reinforced Bar Pressingmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Lockard (1963) claims that "evidence against the facilitation hypothesis is convincing [p. SIS]," but does not discuss most of the evidence which supports it. The hypothesis suggests that increased activity and hence increased LCBP is brought about by increased stimulation (Leaton, Symmes, & Barry, 1963;Lubow & Tighe, 19S7;Nash & Crowder, 1960;Wilson, 1962). Lockard suggests that in acquisition the hypothesis is ruled out by the results of Kling, Horowitz, and Delhagen (1956) who tried to control for facilitation effects by using a yokedcontrol technique.…”

Section: Theories Of Light-reinforced Bar Pressingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positive reinforcement by light: Comments on Lockard's article.

1964

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lockard's (1963) review of studies exploring the conditions controlling light-onset and light-offset reinforcement and theories of light-reinforced bar pressing is discussed. The evidence is reexamined in terms of temporal and response variables and it is shown, contrary to Lockard's conclusions, that the data can then be seen as relatively systematic. Lockard's discussion of theories is criticized on the grounds that in the case of the facilitation hypothesis, the stimulus-change hypothesis, and the discrepancy hypothesis, the position discussed is much more powerful than Lockard suggests. Evidence contrary to Lockard's "preference theory" is cited in the course of the discussion.

show abstract

A Further Study of Weak-Light Reinforcement and Response Facilitation

Cited by 7 publications

References 3 publications

Some effects of light upon the behavior of rodents.

Some effects of light upon the behavior of rodents.

Bar pressing in the rat as a function of variable visual stimulation

Positive reinforcement by light: Comments on Lockard's article.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About