Nonreinforcements versus reinforcements as variables in the partial reinforcement effect.

Studies in Concept Attainment: IV. The Role of Partial Reinforcement as a Function of Age and Intelligence

“…An explanation in terms of nonreinforced trials offered the attraction of being consistent with other experimental findings (3,7). A puzzling aspect of the results was the seeming constancy of number of reinforcements required under PR by all experimental groups (range 29 to 34, while range under CR was 13 to 62).…”

The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situations.

“…When 5s are switched to extinction, the partially reinforced 5s have been trained to respond (approach) in the presence of antedating frustration stimuli, whereas the consistently reinforced 5s have not. 3 3 After the final preparation of this paper an article appeared by Kendler and others (22) in which an interpretation of the partial reinforcement effect is offered which seems In the next sections, arguments and evidence are presented to support the suggested explanatory role of frustrative factors in inconsistent reward situations.…”

Partial reinforcement: A selective review of the literature since 1950.

“…In addition, there are two new entries since 1950. These are: (a) a competing response theory of Weinstock (1954), and one by Hulse and Stanley (1956), and (b) a mediating response theory, espoused by Amsel (1958), Kendler, Pliskoff, and D'Amato (1957) and Logan, Beier, and Kincaid (1956) among others.…”