Contextual determinants of temporal control: Behavioral contrast in a free-operant psychophysical procedure

Silva, Stephanie P. da; Lattal, Kennon A.

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2005.11.005

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After autoshaping (Brown & Jenkins, 1968), the pigeons were trained to peck the side keys when lit green using a discrete-trial procedure similar to that of da Silva and Lattal (2006). Each trial consisted of a single reinforcement schedule running on one of the two side keys and ended after a reinforcer had been delivered.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1). The FOPP was developed to study temporal discrimination processes by assessing how responding transitions from one alternative to another when reinforcement contingencies repeatedly reverse between those alternatives at a specified time (e.g., Bizo & White, 1994;da Silva & Lattal, 2006;Stubbs, 1980). Bizo and White (1994) arranged 50-s trials with pigeons pecking for food reinforcement across two concurrently available keys.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantitative analysis of local-level resurgence

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resurgence is the recurrence of a previously reinforced and then extinguished behavior induced by the extinction of another more recently reinforced behavior. Resurgence provides insight into behavioral processes relevant to treatment relapse of a range of problem behaviors. Resurgence is typically studied across three phases: (1) reinforcement of a target response, (2) extinction of the target and concurrent reinforcement of an alternative response, and (3) extinction of the alternative response, resulting in the recurrence of target responding. Because each phase typically occurs successively and spans multiple sessions, extended time frames separate the training and resurgence of target responding. This study assessed resurgence more dynamically and throughout ongoing training in 6 pigeons. Baseline entailed 50-s trials of a freeoperant psychophysical procedure, resembling Phases 1 and 2 of typical resurgence procedures. During the first 25 s, we reinforced target (left-key) responding but not alternative (right-key) responding; contingencies reversed during the second 25 s. Target and alternative responding followed the baseline reinforcement contingencies, with alternative responding replacing target responding across the 50 s. We observed resurgence of target responding during signaled and unsignaled probes that extended trial durations an additional 100 s in extinction. Furthermore, resurgence was greater and/or sooner when probes were signaled, suggesting an important role of discriminating transitions to extinction in resurgence. The data were well described by an extension of a stimulus-control model of discrimination that assumes resurgence is the result of generalization of obtained reinforcers across space and time. Therefore, the present findings introduce novel methods and quantitative analyses for assessing behavioral processes underlying resurgence.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative analysis of local-level resurgence

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although Machado and Guilhardi (2000) has been cited 13 times (Science Citation Index search, August 18, 2006), it has not been replicated, or extended to other species. Most of these articles referred to the procedure and results obtained by Bizo and White (1995) and, although these experiments used different species, variable interval durations, response, and apparatus, they provided no further evidence to support the specific conclusion that reinforcement rate around the time of switching between the first and second responses, and not differences in overall reinforcement rate per se, determine shifts in the psychophysical function (e.g., Body et al, 2006;da Silva and Lattal, 2006). The remaining citations referred to the theoretical conclusions drawn by Machado and Guilhardi (2000) and, like the other articles, did not replicate the results described (e.g., Bizo et al, 2006;Machado and Pata, 2005;Whitaker et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shifts in the psychophysical function in rats

Guilhardi¹,

MacInnis²,

Church³

et al. 2007

Behavioural Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary goal was to compare results from a free operant procedure with pigeons (Machado and Guilhardi, 2000, Experiment 2) with new results obtained with rats. The secondary goal was to compare the results of both experiments with dependent variables that were not used in the original publication. As in the original study with pigeons, rats were trained on a two-alternative free-operant psychophysical procedure in which left lever press responses were reinforced during the first and second quarters of a 60-s trial, and right lever press responses were reinforced during the third and fourth quarters of the trial. The quarters were reinforced according to four independent variable interval (VI) schedules of reinforcement. The VI duration was manipulated in each quarter, and shifts in the psychophysical functions that relate response rate with time since trial onset were measured. The results obtained with rats were consistent with those previously obtained with pigeons. In addition, results not originally reported were also consistent between rats and pigeons, and provided insights into the perception, memory, and decision processes in Scalar Expectancy Theory and Learning-to-Time Theory.

show abstract

“…The Reynolds and Catania (1961) findings were systematically replicated by da Silva and Lattal (2006). Pigeons responded (keypecking) on a two-component multiple schedule composed of a VI 60-s schedule in one component (correlated with a center red keylight, the red component) and a free-operant psychophysical procedure (FOPP) in a second component (correlated with left and right white keylights).…”

Section: Contextual Variablesmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…In sum, when extinction was in effect on one component of a two-component multiple schedule, temporal control maintained in an FI schedule in another component of that schedule was disrupted (Reynolds & Catania, 1961). Also, in the context of two-component multiple schedules, extinction enhanced temporal control as measured by the FOPP (da Silva & Lattal, 2006). These apparently contradicting results indicate that the effects of extinction depend on the context in which temporal control is maintained.…”

Section: Contextual Variablesmentioning

confidence: 93%

Delayed disruption of temporally controlled behavior

Elcoro¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Delayed Disruption of Temporally Controlled Behavior Mirari Elcoro Delivery of response-independent food during intertrial intervals (ITI) of fixed-interval (FI) schedules was used to examine the resistance to change of temporal control in pigeons. After response rates stabilized on an FI 150 s ITI 135 s, response-independent food was delivered at the beginning of the ITI in one condition and at the end of the ITI in a separate condition (Experiment 1). The ITI then was shortened to 35 s and the same conditions were examined. In Experiment 2, these same conditions were examined, but with responding maintained by an FI 30-s schedule. Differential effects of food location were not obtained in either experiment. The results are discussed in relation to such parameters as delay of disruption, disrupter frequency, ITI duration and general resistance to change of FI schedules.

show abstract

Contextual determinants of temporal control: Behavioral contrast in a free-operant psychophysical procedure

Cited by 4 publications

References 21 publications

Quantitative analysis of local-level resurgence

Quantitative analysis of local-level resurgence

Shifts in the psychophysical function in rats

Delayed disruption of temporally controlled behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About