Some detrimental effects of conditioned reinforcement on the maintenance of dog behavior

Abstract

In animal training, there is disagreement regarding whether a conditioned reinforcer, such as the sound of a clicker, should always be followed by an unconditioned reinforcer, such as a treat. Proponents for clicking without always giving a treat argue that the click can substitute for the reinforcer, due to Pavlovian conditioning and the partial reinforcement effect. Those who advise always following the click with a treat argue that the clicker will become an unreliable predictor of food if it is not always followed by an unconditioned reinforcer. In this study, a within-subject reversal design with two dogs was used to compare the behavioral effects of always following a click with food (one click condition) and only sometimes following a click with food (two clicks condition). Results showed that the two clicks condition disrupted the frequency, accuracy, and topography of the behavior and increased noncompliance and other unwanted behaviors. While the detrimental effects of this condition may seem paradoxical at first, they can be explained by the discriminative properties of the conditioned reinforcer.