Effects of Unsignaled Delay of Reinforcement on Preference and Resistance to Change

Grace, Randolph C.; Schwendiman, Jed W.; Nevin, John A.

doi:10.1901/jeab.1998.69-247

Cited by 61 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Results from experiments in which equal rates of unsignaled delayed and immediate reinforcers are presented in different components of a multiple schedule provide clear examples inconsistent with the predictions of behavioral momentum theory (e.g., Bell, 1999;Grace, Schwendiman, & Nevin, 1998;Reilly & Lattal, 2004). With unsignaled, nonresetting delays to reinforcement, the response that meets a reinforcement schedule requirement starts a delay that is timed independently of further responding during the delay and produces no change in stimulus conditions (e.g., Sizemore & Lattal, 1977, 1978Williams, 1976).…”

Section: ____________________________________________________________mentioning

confidence: 99%

Resistance to Change of Responding Maintained by Unsignaled Delays to Reinforcement: A Response‐bout Analysis

Podlesnik

Jimenez‐Gomez

Ward

et al. 2006

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous experiments have shown that unsignaled delayed reinforcement decreases response rates and resistance to change. However, the effects of different delays to reinforcement on underlying response structure have not been investigated in conjunction with tests of resistance to change. In the present experiment, pigeons responded on a three-component multiple variable-interval schedule for food presented immediately, following brief (0.5 s), or following long (3 s) unsignaled delays of reinforcement. Baseline response rates were lowest in the component with the longest delay; they were about equal with immediate and briefly delayed reinforcers. Resistance to disruption by presession feeding, response-independent food during the intercomponent interval, and extinction was slightly but consistently lower as delays increased. Because log survivor functions of interresponse times (IRTs) deviated from simple modes of bout initiations and within-bout responding, an IRT-cutoff method was used to examine underlying response structure. These analyses suggested that baseline rates of initiating bouts of responding decreased as scheduled delays increased, and within-bout response rates tended to be lower in the component with immediate reinforcers. The number of responses per bout was not reliably affected by reinforcer delay, but tended to be highest with brief delays when total response rates were higher in that component. Consistent with previous findings, resistance to change of overall response rate was highly correlated with resistance to change of bout-initiation rates but not with within-bout responding. These results suggest that unsignaled delays to reinforcement affect resistance to change through changes in the probability of initiating a response bout rather than through changes in the underlying response structure.

show abstract

Section: ____________________________________________________________mentioning

confidence: 99%

Resistance to Change of Responding Maintained by Unsignaled Delays to Reinforcement: A Response‐bout Analysis

Podlesnik

Jimenez‐Gomez

Ward

et al. 2006

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Resistance to change is measured by comparing response rates during disruption such that the response that decreases less, relative to its own baseline rate , is said to be more resistant. Several dimensions of the reinforcer influence resistance to change, including its rate (e.g., Nevin, 1974), immediacy (e.g., Grace, Schwendiman, & Nevin, 1998), magnitude (e.g., Harper, 1996), and quality (Mace, Mauro, Boyajian, & Eckert, 1997). In addition, dimensions of the response that influence resistance are its rate (e.g., Lattal, 1989) and variation (Doughty & Lattal, 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Behavioral History on Resistance to Change

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The present results show that the contiguity between responses and reinforcement is also an important factor that affects choice (cf. Bell, 1999;Grace, Schwendiman, & Nevin, 1998). The implication is that current models for choice are incomplete, since they fail to take into account the temporal contiguity of responding and reinforcers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of free food deliveries and temporal contiguity on choice under concurrent-chain schedules

Scoones

Hucks

McLean

et al. 2009

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

736Research on behavioral choice has studied how nonhumans choose between rewarding outcomes that differ in terms of the immediacy or amount of food reinforcement. This research originated from Herrnstein's (1961) matching law and has led to models for choice that have had substantial impact for understanding human decision making, such as the hyperbolic discounting model for intertemporal choice (see Green & Myerson, 2004, for review). The question posed by the present study is whether choice between two delayed food rewards is affected by providing additional food deliveries independently of responding.Our experiment uses a popular paradigm known as concurrent chains, which measures choice between stimuli that signal different rewarding outcomes. In this procedure, subjects (usually pigeons or rats) respond on two alternatives during a choice phase (initial links) to produce access to one of two mutually exclusive outcome schedules (terminal links). The typical result is that subjects respond more to the initial link that leads to the terminal link that provides the more immediate, larger, or more probable reinforcement. Various models for choice in concurrent chains have been proposed, including the contextual choice model (CCM; Grace, 1994), the hyperbolic value added model (HVA; Mazur, 2001), and delay reduction theory (DRT;Fantino, 1969). Although differing in specific details, the equations for these models assume that choice is determined solely by the temporal relations between stimuli and reinforcement. By contrast, there is no explicit role for the relationship between responding and reinforcement, particularly the contingency and temporal contiguity between choice responses and food.An experiment by Mazur (2003) in which the effect of free food deliveries on choice was investigated is relevant to this issue. In his experiment, pigeons responded on a concurrent-chains schedule in which the initial link was a single variable-interval (VI) 30-sec schedule that arranged equal access to the terminal links, which were associated with 3-sec and 12-sec delays to food. In some conditions of his experiment, the contingency between responding and reinforcement was degraded by adding a variabletime (VT) 30-sec schedule during the initial links, which provided food independently of responding. Although overall initial-link responding would be expected to decrease during sessions with added VT food because of the degraded contingency (Rachlin & Baum, 1972), Mazur (2003) showed that the HVA model predicted that choice for the 3-sec alternative should increase. The reason for this prediction was that the average time to reinforcement from the onset of the initial links, which is an important variable in the HVA model, decreased when the VT schedule provided free food. By contrast, according to CCM, there should be no effect of the free food on choice, because its predictions are affected by the time spent in the initial links, which did not change when the VT schedule operated. Mazur (2003) found that results were c...

show abstract

Effects of Unsignaled Delay of Reinforcement on Preference and Resistance to Change

Cited by 61 publications

References 31 publications

Resistance to Change of Responding Maintained by Unsignaled Delays to Reinforcement: A Response‐bout Analysis

Resistance to Change of Responding Maintained by Unsignaled Delays to Reinforcement: A Response‐bout Analysis

Effects of Behavioral History on Resistance to Change

Effects of free food deliveries and temporal contiguity on choice under concurrent-chain schedules

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About