Stimulus Functions in Chained Fixed‐interval Schedules

Kelleher, Roger T.; Fry, William

doi:10.1901/jeab.1962.5-167

Cited by 63 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies have reported very weak responding in early components of a simple chain fixed-interval schedule (e.g., Catania et al 1980, Davison 1974, Williams 1994review in Kelleher & Gollub 1962). These studies found that chains with as few as three fixed-interval 60-s links (Kelleher & Fry 1962) occasionally produce extreme pausing in the first link. No formal theory of the kind that has proliferated to explain behavior on concurrent chain schedules (discussed below) has been offered to account for these strange results, even though they have been well known for many years.…”

Section: Chain Schedulesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Conversely, the stimulus at the end of the chain that is actually paired with primary reinforcement is assumed to be a conditioned reinforcer; stimuli in the middle sustain responding because they lead to production of a conditioned reinforcer (Catania et al 1980, Kelleher & Gollub 1962. Pairing also explains why behavior is maintained on tandem and scrambled-stimuli chains (Kelleher & Fry 1962). In both cases the stimuli early in the chain are either invariably (tandem) or occasionally (scrambled-stimulus) paired with primary reinforcement.…”

Section: Chain Schedulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Operant Conditioning

Staddon

Cerutti

2003

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

334

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Operant behavior is behavior "controlled" by its consequences. In practice, operant conditioning is the study of reversible behavior maintained by reinforcement schedules. We review empirical studies and theoretical approaches to two large classes of operant behavior: interval timing and choice. We discuss cognitive versus behavioral approaches to timing, the "gap" experiment and its implications, proportional timing and Weber's law, temporal dynamics and linear waiting, and the problem of simple chain-interval schedules. We review the long history of research on operant choice: the matching law, its extensions and problems, concurrent chain schedules, and self-control. We point out how linear waiting may be involved in timing, choice, and reinforcement schedules generally. There are prospects for a unified approach to all these areas.

show abstract

Section: Chain Schedulesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Chain Schedulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Operant Conditioning

Staddon

Cerutti

2003

Annu. Rev. Psychol.

334

213

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some data from two-component chained schedules have been consistent with such a prediction, but in cases where more than two components were involved ("extended" chains), empirical studies have typically shown the rate of responding in the initial component to be lower than that under a tandem schedule, in which no changes in stimulation were provided (Gollub, 1977). This finding has been obtained both with chained fixed-interval (Gollub, 1958;Kelleher & Fry, 1962;Thomas, 1967) and with chained fixed-ratio schedules (Jwaideh, 1973;Thomas, 1964). Often the deficiency in responding has been interpreted as showing that the second, or even the third, stimulus in the sequence is ineffective as a reinforcer.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

Escape From Serial Stimuli Leading to Food

Dinsmoor

Lee

Brown

1986

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If the functional relations governing the strength of a conditioned reinforcer correspond to those obtained with other Pavlovian procedures (e.g., Kaplan, 1984), the termination of stimuli appearing early in the interval between successive food deliveries should be reinforcing. During initial training we presented four key colors, followed by food, in a recurrent sequence to each of 6 pigeons. This established a baseline level of autoshaped pecking. In later sessions, we terminated each of these colors or only the first color for a brief period following each peck, replacing the original color with a standard substitute to avoid darkening the key. Pecking decreased in the presence of the last color in the sequence but increased in the presence of the first. In accord with contemporary models of Pavlovian conditioning, these and other data suggest that the behavioral effects of stimuli in a chain may be better understood in terms of what each stimulus predicts, as measured by relative time to the terminal reinforcer, than in the exclusively positive terms of the traditional formulation (Skinner, 1938). The same model may also account for the initial pause under fixed-interval and fixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement.

show abstract

“…Segal, 1965). Thus, the stimulus correlated with the earliest link of a long chain may be nonreinforcing, or aversive (Kelleher & Fry, 1962). Schedule preference studies (e.g., Findley, 1958) also indicate that stimuli associated with large behavior requirements are less positively reinforcing than stimuli associated with smaller behavior requirements.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward empirical behavior laws: II. Effectiveness of a conditioned reinforcer paired with food and shock

Segal

1965

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a conditioned reinforcer paired with food and shock' Ab8traetA buzzer was paired with food in control rats and with food and shock in experimentals. (1) Baseline bar pressing in experimentals was depressed. (2) Both groups pressed equally often, on the average, to produce the buzzer. (3) Behavior Change was greater in experimentals. The data are consistent with a totalityof-reaction theory of conditioned reinforcement. ProblemConsider the following hypothesis. The strength of a rehlforcer is a function of the totality of reaction to it; as the reaction evoked by a stimulus increases, the reinforcing effect is, first, increasingly positive, and then decreasingly positive, and then increasingly negative; Some data in support of the hypothesis were reviewed in another paper (Segal,1965).Additional support is the following:(1) The opportunity to engage in one behavior may reinforce other behavior. Fighting cocks were reinforced by the sight of another fighting cock; Siamese fighting fish were more reinforced by the sight of their mirror image, or a moving model of another fish in aggressive display, than by the sight of a stationary model. The reinforcingness of the displays was correlated with their tendency to elicit aggressive reactions in S (Thompson, 1963; cf. Breland & Breland, 1961).(2) When a link is added to an operant chain, the quantity of behavior that must occur before primary reinforcement arrives increases. If the totality of reaction evoked by stimuli close to food is about optimal, then adding more reaction by adding more links may move the stimulus toward the decreasing limb of the reinforcing-effect function (cf. Segal, 1965). Thus, the stimulus correlated with the earliest link of a long chain may be nonreinforcing, or aversive (Kelleher & Fry, 1962). Schedule preference studies (e.g., Findley, 1958) also indicate that stimuli associated with large behavior requirements are less positively reinforcing than stimuli associated with smaller behavior requirements. As the requirements progressively rise, the stimuli correlated with the schedule may become aversive (e.g., Appel, 1963;Azrin, 1961).(3) Pliskoff-& Tolliver (1960) transformed a conditioned positive reinforcer to a conditioned negative reinforcer by depriving food-reinforced rats of water. The SD for the food-reinforced operant probably elicited conditioned alimentary respondents which increased in intensity or variety when the SD was presented to rats that were water-as well as food-deprived.Poychon. Sci., 1965, Yolo 2. Evalyn F. Segal SAN DIEGO STATE COLLEGEAs a result, the SD became aversive.(4) A stimulus correlated with a food-reinforcement schedule is more reinforcing when it appears in alternation with a stimulus correlated with extinction, punishment, or a less favorable food-reinforcement schedule (e.g., Reynolds, 1961Reynolds, , 1963Segal, 1964). The alternation of stimuli may elicit SNS reactions that get conditioned to the preferred stimulus. The combination of mil d SNS reactions and alimentary reactions to food may be more re...

show abstract

Stimulus Functions in Chained Fixed‐interval Schedules

Cited by 63 publications

References 3 publications

Operant Conditioning

Operant Conditioning

Escape From Serial Stimuli Leading to Food

Toward empirical behavior laws: II. Effectiveness of a conditioned reinforcer paired with food and shock

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About