The effect of satiation following partial reinforcement

Haas, Robert; Shessel, Frederic M.; Willner, Henry S.; Rescorla, Robert A.

doi:10.3758/bf03331835

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The differences do not stop with resistance to extinction. For example, running speed is also more resistant to satiation (Haas, Shessel, Willner, & Rescorla, 1970) and to punishment (Brown & Wagner, 1964) when it is maintained by partial reinforcement than when it is maintained by CRF, contrary to the free-operant results cited above. Also, across trials, running speed decreases more rapidly in the goal section of the runway than in the start section, during both extinction (e.g., Wagner, 1961) and satiation (Rescorla, 1977).…”

Section: Effects Of Number Of Reinforcerscontrasting

confidence: 66%

Behavioral momentum and the partial reinforcement effect.

Nevin¹

1988

Psychological Bulletin

183

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Publications and Communications Board has opened nominations for the editorship of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology for the years 1990-1995. Don Fowles is the incumbent editor.Candidates must be members of APA and should be available to start receiving manuscripts in early 1989 to prepare for issues published in 1990. Please note that the P&C Board encourages more participation by women and ethnic minority men and women in the publication process and would particularly welcome such nominees. To nominate candidates, prepare a statement of one page or less in support of each candidate. Submit nominations no later than March 1, 1988, to

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Number Of Reinforcerscontrasting

confidence: 66%

Behavioral momentum and the partial reinforcement effect.

Nevin¹

1988

Psychological Bulletin

183

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The data reported here suggest that higher-order conditioning of earlier elements of that compound would be especially encouraged if nonreinforced trials were administered, as in a partial reinforcement procedure. In fact, Haas, Shessel, Willner, and Rescorla (1970) found that rats' performance in an alleyway while food sated was greater after partial than after consistent reinforcement, as would be anticipated if the partial reinforcement procedure resulted in more second-order conditioning. Other differences in behavior maintained on consistent and partial schedules of reinforcement might also be the result of different proportions of firstand second-order conditioning to the various elements of the serial compound established under those procedures (cf.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Second-order conditioning with and without unconditioned stimulus presentation.

Holland¹

1980

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of presenting various episodes after serial presentation of two conditioned stimuli (CS2-CS1 sequences) on second-order conditioning to CS2 were examined in three experiments using rat subjects in an appetitive conditioning situation. In Experiment 1, presentation of food unconditioned stimuli (USs) immediately after CS2-CS1 sequences interfered with second-order conditioning of CS2. In Experiment 2, postsequence presentation of a "surprising" US interfered with second-order conditioning more than did presentation of an "expected" US; similarly, less second-order conditioning of CS2 was observed when postsequence nonpresentation of a US was surprising than when US omission was expected. In Experiment 3, the interfering effect of US presentation on second-order conditioning was smaller when a brief delay was introduced between presentation of the CS2-CS-1 sequence and the US. The results are discussed in terms of an information-processing theory recently proposed by Wagner and his colleagues.

show abstract

“…Some studies prefed animals for short periods of time (Le., 30-90 min) before each test session Cox, 1976;Pencer, 1974). Some studies allowed animals to consume ad-lib food for 1-2 days prior to and during satiated testing (Gragg & Black, 1967;Haas, Shessel, Willner, & Rescorla, 1970;Linton & Miller, 1951), while others allowed ad-lib food consumption for longer periods of time prior to satiated testing, ranging from 10 days to 2 months (Black & Cox, 1973;Capaldi & Myers, 1978;Wong & Traupmann, 1973a, 1973b, 1975. The type of food used to satiate animals in these studies has also varied .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%