Effects of shifts in magnitude and delay of reward upon runway performance in the rat

Shanab, Mitri E.; McCuistion, Sharron

doi:10.3758/bf03330707

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 4 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…27 (5)delay (Group 30-30), whereas Ss shifted from long to short reward delay (Group 30-10) eventually dis played performance levels comparable to those evidenced by the unshifted short delay (10- demonstrate that uncued increases in reward delay depress performance relative to that displayed by Ss trained and maintained on long delay of reward. In this respect, the present findings are in accord with those reported by Shanab & McCuistion (1970) and at odds with other results (Shanab, 1971;Spence, 1956). Previous failures to obtain such depression effects probably reflect minimal variation in delay values from pre-to postshift periods (Spence, 1956) or foreshortened postshift training (Shanab, 1971).…”

Section: Trial Blockscontrasting

confidence: 49%

Changes in delay of reinforcement in simple instrumental conditioning

McHose¹,

Tauber²

1972

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Trial Blockscontrasting

confidence: 49%

Changes in delay of reinforcement in simple instrumental conditioning

McHose¹,

Tauber²

1972

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There is only one instance of a SucPCE (Sgro & Weinstock, 1963), whereas 11 studies report no SucPCE (Ferrel & Shanab, 1975; Harker, 1956; Logan, 1952;McCain et al, , 1977 McHose & Tauber, 1972;Shanab & Biller, 1972;Shanab & Cavallaro, 1975;Shanab &McCuistion, 1970;Shanab et al, 1977Shanab et al, , 1973. The 1 study which did find the SucPCE was unusual in that water was used as the reward, there was only one trial per day, and the 15 slowest rats were eliminated from the experiment.…”

Section: Shifts In Delay Of Rewardmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Five studies report a SucNCE following an increase in delay (McCain, Lobb, Almond, & Leek, 1976; McHose & Tauber, 1972; 420 FLAHERTY Shanab & Biller, 1972;Shanab, Domino, & Melrose, 1977;Shanab & McCuistion, 1970), but eight studies failed to find a SucNCE (Ferrel & Shanab, 1975; Harker, 1956; Logan, 1952; Mackintosh & Lord, 1973-two experiments;McCain, Boodee, & Lobb, 1977;Shanab, 1971;Shanab, Rouse, & Cavallaro, 1973). In addition, Spence (1956) reports the results of experiments by three of his students (as well as the Harker study cited above) which also failed to show evidence of a SucNCE subsequent to shifts in delay.…”

Section: Shifts In Delay Of Rewardmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both SucNCEs and SucPCEs were found when there was a 15-sec delay; neither contrast was found under no-delay conditions. The use of a delay does not, however, guarantee a SucPCE (Shanab " McCuistion, 1970).Another suggestion related to the ceiling effects hypothesis concerns deprivation level. Rats run more slowly in a runway under conditions of relative satiety.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incentive contrast: A review of behavioral changes following shifts in reward

Flaherty

1982

Animal Learning & Behavior

313

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature relevant to incentive contrast effects is reviewed, with emphasis on the data published since the reviews by Black (1968) and Dunham (1968). Contrary to the evidence available for the earlier reviews, the current literature indicates that positive contrast is a reliable phenomenon. Its occurrence is facilitated by use of a constant delay of reward, use of a long runway, or possibly by a shift while a negative contrast effect, resulting from a previous shift, is still present in the animals' behavior. Positive contrast also occurs in consummatory behavior when sucrose or saccharin solutions are shifted. Conditions that are ineffective in producing positive contrast are reviewed, as are the effects of numerous variables on both successive and simultaneous contrast. In addition, positive and negative contrast effects resulting from shifts in delay or percentage of reward, contrast resulting from shifts in sucrose, saccharin, or ethanol solutions, contrast in choice behavior, and transsituational contrast are reviewed. The relationship of the data to several theoretical interpretations of contrast is also considered.Interpretation of the behavior changes that occur when a familiar reward is replaced by a novel, usually less preferred, reward has played an important role in the theoretical analysis of animal learning. For example, Tolman (1932) cited the behavior of a monkey when the familiar reward of a banana was replaced by a piece of lettuce as evidence favoring his view that animals learn expectancies of particular rewards in a learning situation. The behavioral description was obtained in a delayed-response experiment by Tinklepaugh (1928): "She [the monkey] extends her hand to seize the food. But her hand drops to the floor without touching it. She looks at the lettuce but (unless very hungry) does not touch it. She looks under and around her. She picks the cup up and examines it thoroughly inside and out. She has on occasion turned toward observers present in the room and shrieked at them in apparent anger. After several seconds spent searching, she gives a glance toward the other cup, which she has been taught not to look into, and then walks off to a nearby window. The lettuce is left untouched on the floor" (p. 224).In addition to supporting Tolman's expectancy interpretation of animal learning, this description contains elements that continue to be relevant as possible explanations of the behavioral changes that Appreciation is due Alexandra Avdzej for assistance in library research and to HowardBecker, SusanChecke, and MaryFlaherty for their comments on the manuscript. Preparation for this article was aided by grants from the Rutgers Research Council. The author's mailing addressis: Psychology Department, Busch Campus, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey08903. occur subsequent to reward shifts, that is, the apparent presence of an emotional response elicited by the shift and the possibility that the animals search for the missing reward, given the opportunity.A rat study by Elli...

show abstract

“…While, moreover, both positive (Mellgren, Wrather, & Dyck, 1972) and negative (Chechile & Fowler, 1973) results have been obtained in tests for PCEs in differential conditioning proced ures employing "simultaneous" shifts in magnitude of delayed reward, the evidence is overwhelmingly negative in cases of simultaneous (Chechile & Fowler, 1973;Gavelek & McHose, 1970) and successive (McHose & Tauber, 1972;Shanab & McCuistion, 1970;Shanab, Rouse, & Cavallaro, 1973) shifts in the length of delay under a constant magnitude of reward, even though in these latter situations delayed reinforcement also reduces asymptotic levels of performance and thus should make it possible for PCEs to be demonstrated. Due to this ambiguity and sparcity of present empirical evidence, additional data are needed to clarify both the specific circumstances which give rise to the PCE under delayed reinforcement and to indicate whether the physiological limit is a correct explanation to account for the consistent absence of PCEs with immediate reinforcement, and the present study provides additional evidence in this regard.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Shifts in magnitude of delayed and immediate reward

Black

1975

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a 2 by 2 factorial design, 48 albino rats were trained in a straight runway to receive either a large or a small magnitude of immediate or delayed reward, after which all groups received the large reward for an additional phase of training. The groups receiving immediate reinforcement performed more rapidly than the delayed groups throughout the experiment. The effects for reward magnitude were complex, and there was some suggestion that delayed reinforcement produced a reversal of the usual superior performance for a large reward. While delayed upshifted subjects briefly overshot the performance level of large-reward controls, group differences were not reliable, and this failure to obtain a positive contrast effect did not seem to be due to a physiological limit.

show abstract

Effects of shifts in magnitude and delay of reward upon runway performance in the rat

Cited by 16 publications

References 4 publications

Changes in delay of reinforcement in simple instrumental conditioning

Changes in delay of reinforcement in simple instrumental conditioning

Incentive contrast: A review of behavioral changes following shifts in reward

Shifts in magnitude of delayed and immediate reward

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About