BEHAVIORAL AFTEREFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT AND ITS OMISSION AS A FUNCTION OF REINFORCEMENT MAGNITUDE<sup>1</sup>

Jensen, Craig C.; Fallon, Daniel

doi:10.1901/jeab.1973.19-459

Cited by 34 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rats in this group exhibited a greater number of press bursts (≥ 3 presses/s, 1.2 ± 0.36 bursts/min, n= 24) compared to the reward available group (0.11 ± 0.11 bursts/min, n= 24; unpaired t test, *p= 0.010, t = 2.68). This is consistent with previous studies showing that omission of an expected reward increases reward-seeking responses (Burokas et al, 2012; Dudley and Papini, 1997; Stout et al, 2002), a phenomenon initially described as a reinforcement-omission effect or frustration effect (Amsel and Roussel, 1952; Jensen and Fallon, 1973). …”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Thalamic Regulation of Sucrose Seeking during Unexpected Reward Omission

Monte

Minier-Toribio

Quiñones-Laracuente

et al. 2017

Neuron

155

197

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY The paraventricular nucleus of the thalamus (PVT) is thought to regulate behavioral responses under emotionally arousing conditions. Reward-associated cues activate PVT neurons, however, the specific PVT efferents regulating reward-seeking remain elusive. Using a cued sucrose-seeking task, we manipulated PVT activity under two emotionally distinct conditions: 1) when reward was available during the cue as expected, or 2) when reward was unexpectedly omitted during the cue. Pharmacological inactivation of the anterior PVT (aPVT), but not the posterior PVT, increased sucrose-seeking only when reward was omitted. Consistent with this, photoactivation of aPVT neurons abolished sucrose-seeking, and the firing of aPVT neurons differentiated reward availability. Photoinhibition of aPVT projections to the nucleus accumbens or to the amygdala increased or decreased, respectively, sucrose-seeking only when reward was omitted. Our findings suggest that PVT bidirectionally modulates sucrose-seeking under the negative (frustrative) conditions of reward omission.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Thalamic Regulation of Sucrose Seeking during Unexpected Reward Omission

Monte

Minier-Toribio

Quiñones-Laracuente

et al. 2017

Neuron

155

197

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is consistent with previous findings of the same relationship on the Fl schedule (Jensen and Fallon, 1973;Lowe et al 1974;Staddon, 1970), and on tand FR I Fl, and FR schedules . Moreover, the extent to which responding ceased after reinforcement was related also to the schedule parameter, indicating that the effect of the reinforcer magnitude was not absolute, but relative to the baseline postreinforcement pause produced by a given schedule.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

AFTEREFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT ON VARIABLE‐RATIO SCHEDULES¹

Priddle-Higson

Lowe

Harzem

1976

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On each of variable-ratio 10, 40, and 80 schedules of reinforcement, when rats' leverpressing rates were stable, the concentration of a liquid reinforcer was varied within sessions. The duration of the postreinforcement pause was an increasing function of the reinforcer concentration, this effect being more marked the higher the schedule parameter. The running rate, calculated by excluding the postreinforcement pause, was unaffected by concentrationi. The duration of the postreinforcement pause increased with the schedule parameter, but the proportion of the interreinforcement interval taken up by the pause decreased. Consequently, the overall response rate was an increasing function of the schedule parameter; i.e., it was inversely related to reinforcement frequency, contrary to the law of effect. The runining rate, however, decreased with the reinforcement frequency, in accord with the law of effect. When 50% of reinforcements were randomly omitted, the postomission pause was shorter than the postreinforcement pause, but the running rate of responses was not affected.Key words: reinforcement magnitude, postreinforcement pause, running rate, reinforcement omission, law of effect, variable ratio, rats It is an almost universal phenomenon that the presentation of a reinforcing stimulus is followed by a pause in responding. Given that the reinforcer is a food substance this is not surprising, since for a period after reinforcement the subject is occupied in consummatory activity. In many schedules, however, the postreinforcement pause is longer than the time taken to consume the reinforcer. Moreover, on several sclhedules of reinforcement, the duration of the postreinforcement pause is affected by variables other than time taken to eat. For example, on a fixed-interval (FI) schedule, it is an increasing function of the duration of the fixed interval (Schneider, 1969;Sherman, 1959), and of the concentration of a liquid reinforcer when the amount is held constant (Lowe, Davey, and Harzem, 1974).One explanation of this phenomenon is that the reinforcer functions as a discriminative stimulus, signalling the start of a period in whiclh reinforcement is not available (Ferster 'These data form part of a doctoral dissertation submitted to the

show abstract

“…DISCUSSION This experiment replicated Staddon's (1970) finding that large reinforcer magnitudes lead to lower response rates than small magnitudes. Jensen and Fallon (1973) have also reported a similar result. They exposed rats to a two-component, multiple PI PI schedule in which the reinforcer magnitude was manipulated in the first component.…”

Section: Apparatussupporting

confidence: 62%

Reinforcement contexts effects on fixed-interval responding

Madigan

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three rats responding on fixed-interval schedules received either 1 or 4 pellets at the end of 2-min intervals. Five experimental conditions manipulated the relative probabilities of these two reinforcers. Response rates following the l-pellet reinforcer were always higher than the rates following the 4-pellet reinforcer. The rates after the l-pellet reinforcer were also highest in those experimental conditions where it was delivered with low probability. Contrast effects were observed when two sequential fixed intervals differed in reinforcer magnitudes. It was concluded that the context of reinforcement as well as the specific reinforcer magnitude affects responding under fixed-interval schedules.When rats and pigeons respond for food reinforcement at fixed intervals (FI), their response patterns show a pause after reinforcement followed by an increase in responding (Ferster & Skinner, 1957). This familiar scallop pattern produced by FI schedules is disrupted when a brief blackout is substituted for some of the scheduled reinforcements. Innis (1966, 1969) found that reinforcement omission produced high rates of responding in the interval following nonreinforcement. Staddon (1967Staddon ( , 1972 has proposed that one effect of reinforcement on FI schedules is to produce a temporal inhibition of responding. He suggested that this inhibition creates the postreinforcement pause and the slowly increasing response rate characteristic of FI performance. In the absence of reinforcement, the inhibition does not occur and high rates of responding result. Staddon (1970) has demonstrated that temporal inhibition increases with the reinforcer magnitude. Pigeons responding on an FI l-rnin schedule experienced variations in the magnitude of reinforcement delivered during an experimental session. Response rates varied inversely with the size of the preceding reinforcer: large amounts of reinforcement led to lower response rates than small amounts of reinforcement.One important issue relevant to variations in the magnitude of reinforcement is whether these effects are relative or absolute (e.g., Black, 1968). Bevan (1963) and others (Bower, 1961;Helson, 1964) have suggested that the behavioral effect of a specific reinforcer magnitude depends on the set of previous reinforcer magnitudes experienced by the organism. A small reinforcer magnitude may produce one effect when it is delivered after a series of other small reinforcers and quite a different effect when it is embedded in a context of large reinforcers. Harzem, Lowe, and Davey (1975) have reported data which seem to show such a context effect. In one condition, rats were exposed to a fixed reinforcer magnitude under a FI 3-min schedule. Daily sessions continued until stable performance was observed and then a new magnitude of reinforcement was introduced. During the first three sessions, postreinforcement pausing was an increasing function of the magnitude of the new reinforcer; however, this effect disappeared with continued exposure to the reinforcer. Harzem et al....

show abstract

BEHAVIORAL AFTEREFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT AND ITS OMISSION AS A FUNCTION OF REINFORCEMENT MAGNITUDE¹

Abstract: Performance following reinforcement omission has been studied with a variety of species in a number of different situations (e.g., Amsel and

Cited by 34 publications

References 31 publications

Thalamic Regulation of Sucrose Seeking during Unexpected Reward Omission

Thalamic Regulation of Sucrose Seeking during Unexpected Reward Omission

AFTEREFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT ON VARIABLE‐RATIO SCHEDULES¹

Reinforcement contexts effects on fixed-interval responding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

BEHAVIORAL AFTEREFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT AND ITS OMISSION AS A FUNCTION OF REINFORCEMENT MAGNITUDE1

Abstract: Performance following reinforcement omission has been studied with a variety of species in a number of different situations (e.g., Amsel and

Cited by 34 publications

References 31 publications

Thalamic Regulation of Sucrose Seeking during Unexpected Reward Omission

Thalamic Regulation of Sucrose Seeking during Unexpected Reward Omission

AFTEREFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT ON VARIABLE‐RATIO SCHEDULES1

Reinforcement contexts effects on fixed-interval responding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

BEHAVIORAL AFTEREFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT AND ITS OMISSION AS A FUNCTION OF REINFORCEMENT MAGNITUDE¹

AFTEREFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT ON VARIABLE‐RATIO SCHEDULES¹