Durable secondary reinforcement using brain stimulation as the primary reinforcer.

Knott, Paul D.; Clayton, Keith N.

doi:10.1037/h0022879

Cited by 36 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The data presented here show that conditioned reinforcement based on ESB can be observed using chain schedules and are consistent with the data of Knott and Clayton (1966), Stein (1958), andTrowill andHynek (1970). In addition, these data supplement and extend those of Beninger et al (in press) and Cantor (1971) which showed that signaled ESB was capable of maintaining responding on schedules of intermittent reinforcement.…”

Section: Behaviorsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…All rats learned to press the lever, and Skinner concluded that the click of the dispenser was a conditioned reinforcer. A similar method has been used by Knott and Clayton (1966), Mogenson (1965), Stein (1958), and Trowill and Hynek (1970) to study conditioned reinforcement based on ESB . Three of these studies reported that stimuli previously associated with ESB could be used to train a new response; they also showed that the new response could be made discriminantly, eliminating the possibility of attributing the effect to, for example, changes in general activity (cf.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conditioned reinforcement based on reinforcing electrical stimulation of the brain: Chain schedules

Beninger

Milner

1977

Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A brief critical review of experiments on conditioned reinforcement based on electrical stimulation of the brain (ESB) revealed that the reported failures to show the effect were a result of methodological aspects of the research; conditioned ·reinforcement based on ESB has been demonstrated by several experimenters and is, therefore, a reliable phenomenon. Consistent with this was the observation in five rats of positively accelerated responding through the fixed interval (FI) of a chain FI l-min random-interval (RI) 20-secschedule where the RI component was in effect for 1 min. Reinforcement consisted of signaled trains of ESB. In a control procedure, three rats, trained on a tandem FI I-min RI 20-sec schedule, showed much higher FI response rates and less positively accelerated responding. It was concluded that conditioned reinforcement was observed in the chain and that traditional theories of the behavioral effects of ESB could not account for these and earlier data.Brief trains of electrical stimulation of the brain (ESB) can be used to establish and maintain operant responding (Olds & Milner, 1954), thereby making ESB a positive reinforcing stimulus (Skinner, 1938). Typically, neutral stimuli that are associated with a reinforcer can themselves acquire the properties of a reinforcer; for example, Skinner (1938, pp. 82-83) showed that a sound previously associated with the presentation of food to a food-deprived rat could be used to condition a new response . The sound, therefore, was defined as a conditioned reinforcer.There is some question about the conditions necessary for a neutral stimulus associated with ESB to acquire reinforcing properties. As a result of this uncertainty, it has been suggested that the behavioral effects of ESB and conventional (e.g., food) reinforcing stimuli differ (Gallistel, 1973). It is our contention that conditioned reinforcement based on ESB primary reinforcement is a reliable phenomenon . This paper will review previous experiments showing that failures to observe conditioned reinforcement based on ESB can be attributed to methodological aspects of the research rather than to ESB per se. In addition, data are presented from rats trained to respond for ESB according to chain schedules; these data provide additional evidence that stimuliThe authors wish to thank the following for assistance: S. Amir with surgery and J . Bayreuther in runn ing the animals.

show abstract

Section: Behaviorsupporting

confidence: 79%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditioned reinforcement based on reinforcing electrical stimulation of the brain: Chain schedules

Beninger

Milner

1977

Psychobiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A randomly selected one third of these presentations (27 presentations) were paired with the delivery of two 45 mg food pellets. Food presentations were partially, rather than continuously, paired with the lights-on stimulus presentations because Knott and Clayton (1966) demonstrated a greater magnitude of conditioned reward following partial pairing.…”

Section: Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blockade of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in the ventral tegmental area disrupts food-related learning in rats

Sharf

Ranaldi

2005

Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the first session food followed each stimulus, but in the last three, food was presented only on a random 33% of the trials. Such partial pairing techniques have been shown to produce more reliable CRt effects (Knott and Clayton 1966). If any rat failed to eat the pellets, his data were discarded from subsequent analyses.…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of (+)-amphetamine and apomorphine on responding for a conditioned reinforcer

Mazurski

Beninger

1986

Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two psychomotor stimulants, (+)-amphetamine and apomorphine, were examined for effects on associative learning and responding for a conditioned reinforcer. The experimental phases included: preexposure to an operant test chamber with two levers, each of which produced a neutral stimulus when pressed; pairings of one stimulus with food; and a subsequent test of lever pressing for the two stimuli. Groups of food deprived rats (n = 8-12) were given IP injections of one stimulant prior to each pairing or testing session. Given during pairings, (+)-amphetamine produced a dose-related attenuation of responding for the conditioned stimulus in the test; doses of 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0, but not 0.25 or 4.0 mg/kg, given during the test enhanced responding, as did 0.5 mg/kg given in both phases. Apomorphine did not significantly alter responding during testing when administered in either the pairing (0 0.75 mg/kg) or test (0.5 1.0 mg/kg) phase. The results suggest that the modulation of conditioned reinforcement by psychomotor stimulants may occur through a presynaptic influence. Furthermore, the results with (+)-amphetamine suggest that this drug differentially affects the learning of an association between a conditioned and unconditioned stimulus versus the acquisition of responding for that conditioned stimulus.

show abstract

Durable secondary reinforcement using brain stimulation as the primary reinforcer.

Cited by 36 publications

References 5 publications

Conditioned reinforcement based on reinforcing electrical stimulation of the brain: Chain schedules

Conditioned reinforcement based on reinforcing electrical stimulation of the brain: Chain schedules

Blockade of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in the ventral tegmental area disrupts food-related learning in rats

The effects of (+)-amphetamine and apomorphine on responding for a conditioned reinforcer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About