Transfer of persistence from fixed-ratio barpress training to runway extinction

T, McCuller; Wong, Paul T. P.; Amsel, Abram

doi:10.3758/bf03211986

Cited by 39 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One theory that accounts for the development of task persistence is the Learned Industriousness (LI) Theory (Eisenberger, 1992), which proposes a learning-based model of motivation whereby people with a history of gaining rewards for effortful behaviors are more likely to persist in behaviors requiring high effort than those without such a learning history. Human (Boyagian, & Nation, 1981;Eisenberger, 1992;Eisenberger, Heerdt, Hamdi, Zimet, & Bruckmeir, 1979) and animal (McCuller, Wong, & Amsel, 1976;Wenrich, Eckman, & Moore, 1967) laboratory studies support the hypothesis that organisms receiving rewards for high effort show greater persistence than organisms receiving rewards for low efforts.…”

Section: Task Persistencementioning

confidence: 72%

“…These relationships between task persistence and smoking-related variables can be explained by Eisenberger's Industriousness theory (1992) which hypothesizes that task persistence will be higher in those with a learning history of being rewarded for effortful behavior (Boyagian & Nation, 1981;Eisenberger, 1992;Eisenberger et al, 1979;McCuller et al, 1976;Wenrich et al, 1967). This fact is relevant in that quitting smoking involves persisting in an effortful behavior (i.e., resisting a desire to smoke) in the face of physical discomfort or psychological stress.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relationship between self-reported task persistence and history of quitting smoking, plans for quitting smoking, and current smoking status in adolescents

Steinberg

Krejci²,

Collett

et al. 2007

Addictive Behaviors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The task persistence construct has previously been measured primarily behaviorally (e.g., with a mirror-tracing task, or breath holding), and only in adults. It has been shown to differentiate between adult smokers and non-smokers and to predict smoking cessation in adult smokers trying to quit. This theory-based analysis is the first to examine task persistence in adolescent smokers and to examine a two-item, internally consistent, self-report measure of task persistence. Results indicate that task persistence is greater among adolescent non-smokers as compared to adolescent current smokers, and those planning to quit smoking as compared to those with no plans to quit. Contrary to hypotheses, task persistence was not found to be related to prior successful attempts to quit smoking. Our results suggest that a brief, self-report measure of task persistence may be a methodologically sound, practical clinical tool for this population.

show abstract

Section: Task Persistencementioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between self-reported task persistence and history of quitting smoking, plans for quitting smoking, and current smoking status in adolescents

Steinberg

Krejci²,

Collett

et al. 2007

Addictive Behaviors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this kind of experiment, transfer of persistence is investigated across different definitions of reward schedules and different response topographies (McCuller, Wong, & Amsel, 1976). The transfer in the case was from operant training on successive fixed ratios (FR) to extinction in a runway at one trial a day.…”

Section: Transfer Of Persistence: How General?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Précis ofFrustration Theory: An Analysis of Dispositional Learning and Memory

Amsel

1994

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a precis of a book on frustration theory, whose explanatory domain includes a family of phenom~na that have been summarized by the terms dispositional learning and memory-systems that ordmarily have a long-term historical etiology, and in which the learning is relatively reflexive and the memo~implicit and not strongly episodic. The book is an attempt, in the context of stimulusre~ponse l~a~mng theOI'~' to present in some detail an animal-based model of frustration as it is appIled to a Ilmlted-but stIll large-number of these experimentally established phenomena (perhaps the largest number organized by anyone such theory). These bear some resemblance to equivalent phen~mena in humans, to which the descriptive terms arousal, suppression, persistence, and regre~sIOn have been applied. An explicit caveat is that this is a book on one particular theory of frustratIOn and not a book on frustration theories. Whereas it does address other theories of frustration its main purpose is to review a line of theorizing and experimental research that has evolved ove; some 40 years: an analysis of the status of the concept of frustration in learning theory.In the history of the scientific study of learning and memory, a number of terms have been used to describe abstract experimental paradigms that purport to represent different mechanisms of learning. In the book discussed here, I refer to several of these, the most fundamental being classical (Pavlovian) conditioning and instrumental (Thorndikian) learning. These two are central to understanding the phenomena I will call the rewardschedule effects. These phenomena depend on a variety of interactions between reward and nonreward, and they are the basis for a family of generalizations known as frustration theory.My major thesis, in general terms, is that there is inherent in such reward schedules the buildup of primary frustration, defined simply as a temporary state that results when a response is nonreinforced (or nonrewarded, in more neutral language, in the appetitive case) in the presence of a reward expectancy; that a learned or anticipatory form of this temporally labile state, based on classical conditioning, can be elicited by an originally indifferent or neutral cue; that this conditional form of frustration, like other learned states, is permanent, at least for a given situation; and that, together, the primary (unlearned) and the secondary (learned) forms can account for a number of important processes in the dynamics of instrumental behavior, summarized by four familiar behavioral concepts: arousal, suppression, persistence, and regression. These four concepts define I am greatly indebted to Elizabeth Capaldi and Michael Rashotte for their valuable suggestions for revision of an earlier draft of this precis.

show abstract

“…When behavior is reinforced partially or intermittently rather than continuously during acquisition, extinction occurs much more slowly once reinforcement is ceased, implying that a higher level of behavioral persistence has been created (Pittenger, 2002 ; Domjan, 2005 ). Moreover, research in animals and human adults suggests that repeated experience with PRF of desired behavior can lead to generalized behavioral persistence in the face of setbacks, adversity and lack of (further) reinforcement (e.g., McCuller et al, 1976 ; Boyagian and Nation, 1981 ; for a review see Amsel, 1992 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working Memory and Reinforcement Schedule Jointly Determine Reinforcement Learning in Children: Potential Implications for Behavioral Parent Training

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Behavioral Parent Training (BPT) is often provided for childhood psychiatric disorders. These disorders have been shown to be associated with working memory impairments. BPT is based on operant learning principles, yet how operant principles shape behavior (through the partial reinforcement (PRF) extinction effect, i.e., greater resistance to extinction that is created when behavior is reinforced partially rather than continuously) and the potential role of working memory therein is scarcely studied in children. This study explored the PRF extinction effect and the role of working memory therein using experimental tasks in typically developing children.Methods: Ninety-seven children (age 6–10) completed a working memory task and an operant learning task, in which children acquired a response-sequence rule under either continuous or PRF (120 trials), followed by an extinction phase (80 trials). Data of 88 children were used for analysis.Results: The PRF extinction effect was confirmed: We observed slower acquisition and extinction in the PRF condition as compared to the continuous reinforcement (CRF) condition. Working memory was negatively related to acquisition but not extinction performance.Conclusion: Both reinforcement contingencies and working memory relate to acquisition performance. Potential implications for BPT are that decreasing working memory load may enhance the chance of optimally learning through reinforcement.

show abstract

Transfer of persistence from fixed-ratio barpress training to runway extinction

Cited by 39 publications

References 23 publications

Relationship between self-reported task persistence and history of quitting smoking, plans for quitting smoking, and current smoking status in adolescents

Relationship between self-reported task persistence and history of quitting smoking, plans for quitting smoking, and current smoking status in adolescents

Précis ofFrustration Theory: An Analysis of Dispositional Learning and Memory

Working Memory and Reinforcement Schedule Jointly Determine Reinforcement Learning in Children: Potential Implications for Behavioral Parent Training

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About