2010
DOI: 10.1007/bf03395697
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of Response-Signal Temporal Separation on Behavior Maintained Under Temporally Defined Schedules of Delayed Signaled Reinforcement

Abstract: The present study assessed the effects of systematically separating the cue from the response in temporally defined schedules of delayed signaled reinforcement. Identical schedules were used to study the effects of the independent variable on response acquisition and response maintenance. In the first experiment, 8 groups of 3 naïve rats were exposed to 1 of 8 temporally defined schedules that differed in both the duration of a response opportunity and responsesignal temporal separation. In the second experime… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

2
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 26 publications
(48 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The latter were, in several cases, relatively small. Previous experiments with rats and pigeons indicated that, when reinforcement rate is held constant (Gleeson & Lattal, 1987; Pulido & Martinez, 2010; Sizemore & Lattal, 1978) between immediate and delay of reinforcement conditions, response rates still decrease substantially when delays are imposed. Although these previous experiments suggest minimal effects of reinforcement rate changes relative to those of the delay itself, there remains the possibility that the reduction in reinforcement rate acts in combination with the delay to contribute to the response rate reductions observed in this experiment.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latter were, in several cases, relatively small. Previous experiments with rats and pigeons indicated that, when reinforcement rate is held constant (Gleeson & Lattal, 1987; Pulido & Martinez, 2010; Sizemore & Lattal, 1978) between immediate and delay of reinforcement conditions, response rates still decrease substantially when delays are imposed. Although these previous experiments suggest minimal effects of reinforcement rate changes relative to those of the delay itself, there remains the possibility that the reduction in reinforcement rate acts in combination with the delay to contribute to the response rate reductions observed in this experiment.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%