Effects of alcohol on reinforced repetitions and reinforced variations in rats

McElroy, Elizabeth; Neuringer, Allen

doi:10.1007/bf02245743

Cited by 31 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They also indicate a dissociation similar to that described by Grunow and Neuringer (2002): Response rates were primarily controlled by reinforcement frequencies (in Grunow & Neuringer, 2002) and delays (in the present experiment), whereas response variability was primarily controlled by reinforcement contingencies in both experiments. The results are consistent as well with previous studies showing that reinforced variability is relatively immune to adverse impact from other reinforcementweakening events (Cohen et al, 1990;Doughty & Lattal, 2001;Grunow & Neuringer, 2002;McElroy & Neuringer, 1990;Neuringer, 1991).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Operant variability when reinforcement is delayed

Wagner

Neuringer

2006

Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Operant variability when reinforcement is delayed

Wagner

Neuringer

2006

Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…(Counting in binary, and arbitrarily assigning L = 0 and R = 1, these are sequences 0, 7, and 1, respectively.) Previous research had shown that when V ARIA TION AND SELECTION 85 reinforcement was provided independently of sequence variability in a two-lever chamber, rats were most likely to respond on a single lever and that LRRR was more likely to occur than LLLR (e. g., McElroy & Neuringer, 1990;Morgan & Neuringer, 1990;Neuringer & Huntley, 1992). We therefore hypothesized that LLLL would most readily be strengthened by an always contingency and that LRRR would more readily be strengthened than LLLR.…”

Section: Experiments 2 Selection As a Function Of Sequence Difficultymentioning

confidence: 94%

Reinforced variation and selection

Neuringer

1993

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long-Evans rats were reinforced for generating variable sequences of four left (L) and right (R) leverpress responses. If the current sequence, for example, LLRR, differed from each of the preceding five sequences, then a food pellet was provided. Otherwise, there was a brief time-out. After the rats were generating a variety of sequences, one sequence was concurrently reinforced whenever it occurred, that is, an "always-reinforced" contingency was superimposed. The frequency of that sequence increased significantly from the variable baseline (Experiment 1). The "difficulty" of the always-reinforced sequence influenced the extent to which its frequency increased-"easy" sequences increased greatly, but "difficult" ones increased not at all (Experiment 2, and a replication with pigeons in Experiment 3). However, when reinforcement for baseline variability was systematically decreased while a difficult sequence was always reinforced, that sequence slowly emerged and attained relatively high levels (Experiments 4 and 5). Thus, a technique for training even highly improbable, or difficult-to-Iearn, behaviors is provided by concurrent reinforcement of variation and selection.

show abstract

“…McElroy and Neuringer (1990) reported that alcohol may lead to increases in both response variability and response stereotypy. They administered alcohol to 2 groups of animals, 1 of which was given training to perform a task requiring sequence variability; the other was given training to perform a task requiring sequence repetition.…”

Section: Other Factors That Influence Response Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Schedule-Induced and Operant Mechanisms that Influence Response Variability: A Review and Implications for Future Investigations

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response variability, a fundamental characteristic of behavior, may be in some cases an induced effect of reinforcement schedules. Research on schedule-induced response variability has shown that continuous reinforcement results in less variability than intermittent reinforcement schedules. Studies on the effects of intermittency of reinforcement, periodicity of reinforcement, and type of schedule have resulted in mixed findings. Contingencies have also been arranged to directly influence operant response variability. These include lag reinforcement schedules, differential reinforcement of novel behavior, differential reinforcement of less frequent behavior, and percentile reinforcement schedules. These procedures are discussed in terms of practicality and implications for use in applied settings. Contingencies and treatment packages that indirectly influence response variability are addressed in terms of response allocation, response generalization, and response covariation. Studies on the effects of a variety of other variables on response variability are also reported, such as levels of food deprivation and drugs. Finally, directions for applied research in response variability are suggested.Traditionally, behavioral variability has been considered an intrinsic, uncontrollable characteristic of behavior or a result of unforeseen, uncontrolled variables (Neuringer, 2002). As a result, the identification of methods to reduce the effects of potential sources of variability has been an important component of much research (Sidman, 1960). Alternatively, behavioral variability itself has been a recent topic of research and can have important implications, both theoretical and practical. From a theoretical perspective, such research has provided behavior analysts with a basis for the investigation of topics considered to be out of the realm of learning theory, such as creativity and originality (Marr, 2003). From a practical standpoint, the identification of conditions that lead to, maintain, or decrease response variability should aid in the refinement of existing practices and the development of new procedures that help reduce stereotypy among the clinical population. Such procedures could 430 LEE ET AL. be used to increase generative language, problem-solving skills, creative play, and normalistic social interactions.Although a behavior analysis of creative behavior is difficult, it is not new. Maltzman (1960) provided one of the earlier reviews of research in which people were taught "original" behavior. More recently, Shahan and Chase (2002) provided a review of behavioral concepts (e.g., adduction) that influence response variability and discussed how they relate to creativity and language. The concepts included stimulus generalization, conceptual behavior, and verbal operants. Neuringer (2002) provided an in-depth review of various procedures, noted their implications for treatment in applied settings, and discussed the sources of variability. Marr (2003) has recently rebutted traditional criticisms of a beha...

show abstract

Effects of alcohol on reinforced repetitions and reinforced variations in rats

Cited by 31 publications

References 22 publications

Operant variability when reinforcement is delayed

Operant variability when reinforcement is delayed

Reinforced variation and selection

Schedule-Induced and Operant Mechanisms that Influence Response Variability: A Review and Implications for Future Investigations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About