1982
DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1982.38-157
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Conditional Acceleration and External Disinhibition of Operant Lever Pressing by Prereward, Neutral, and Reinforcing Stimuli

Abstract: Rats responding under a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule increased their rates of lever pressing during a 20-second click/flash stimulus that preceded the delivery of a response-independent food pellet. The increase could not be attributed to suppression of collateral behavior that has been said to mediate temporally-spaced responding. We propose that the prereward stimulus functioned as an external disinhibitor of lever pressing that had been inhibited by the constraints of the operant schedule… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

1983
1983
1983
1983

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 40 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There was little to support a contention that the timing of the operant was dependent upon the pattern, sequencing, or temporal distribution of the preceding activities. These results are also consistent with those of Hemmes and Rubinsky (1982), who observed wheel running, chewing, and drinking in rats that were lever pressing on a DRL schedule. Wheel running, the most frequent activity, was prevented and two of the three rats showed no increase in lever-pressing rates.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…There was little to support a contention that the timing of the operant was dependent upon the pattern, sequencing, or temporal distribution of the preceding activities. These results are also consistent with those of Hemmes and Rubinsky (1982), who observed wheel running, chewing, and drinking in rats that were lever pressing on a DRL schedule. Wheel running, the most frequent activity, was prevented and two of the three rats showed no increase in lever-pressing rates.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%