Human partial reinforcement extinction effects: An information processing development from Capaldi's sequential theory.

Abstract

A series of experiments was designed to evaluate the applicability of Capaldi's sequential hypothesis for describing human partial reinforcement-extinction effects (PREEs). The 5s were required to make a decision about whether or not to gamble on an uncertain outcome. Experiment I was designed to determine whether the experimental context would result in a usual PREE. Experiment II evaluated the memory trace assumptions of the theory via the use of intertrial reinforcements. The third, fourth, and fifth experiments were designed to evaluate assumptions concerning the effects of patterns of reinforcements and nonreinforcements on the PREE. Similarities between Capaldi's sequential hypothesis of instrumental learning and other sequential theories of human choice behavior were noted. The results were in general agreement with predictions from sequential theory. It was suggested that human choice behavior can be best described as a situation where 5s process information for the purpose of developing sequential response strategies.

Developing a Technology for the Use of Operant Extinction in Clinical Settings: An Examination of Basic and Applied Research

“…Most investigations of the PREE manipulated the percentage of reinforced responses or trials during acquisition and demonstrated that resistance was inversely related to these percentages. However, results of studies with both humans and nonhumans, conducted primarily by Capaldi and colleagues, suggest that resistance to extinction is determined by other factors related to reinforcement schedules, such as the number of consecutive nonreinforced trials preceding a reinforced trial (N length), the number of different N lengths, and the number of each N length (e.g., Capaldi, 1964;Halpern & Poon, 1971;Litchfield & Duerfeldt, 1969;Meyers & Capaldi, 1970). In addition, the PREE is more likely to occur when PRF is combined with other variables, including lengthy acquisition training (Uhl & Young, 1967), large reinforcement magnitudes (Amsel, Hug, & Surridge, 1968), delayed reinforcement (L. Peterson, 1956), and massed acquisition trials (Sheffield, 1949).…”

The Value of Vocalizing: Five‐Month‐Old Infants Associate Their Own Noncry Vocalizations With Responses From Caregivers

“…Previous studies of human infant learning, however, have not looked for partial reinforcement effects or extinction bursts. In contrast, partial reinforcement effects are robust in adults and have been demonstrated in a variety of tasks (see review by Halpern & Poon, 1971). For example, when adults learn to move a joystick in one of four directions to receive reinforcement, they persist longer when trained under conditions of partial reinforcement (Pittenger & Pavlik, 1988).…”

Resistance to extinction in humans as a function of sequential variables and amount of acquisition training

“…When subjects are given relatively extended training (i.e., when asymptotic habit strength is reached), N-Iength is more frequently the major determiner of resistance to extinction. This prediction was supported by Halpern and Poon (1971) using extended training, but no continuous reinforcement control group was included. The first study reported below gave subjects extended training (26 trials) with two different 50% reinforcement schedules.…”

“…In the first study, it was anticipated that extended acquisition training would cause the reinforcement schedule with the longer N-Iength to produce greater resistance to extinction, as one would expect given Halpern and Poon's (1971) results. Although the schedule with the longer N-Iengths did produce greater resistance to extinction, the results failed to show any partial reinforcement effect for the group that received short N-Iengths coupled with many N-R transitions.…”

“…Grosslight, Hall, and Murnin (1953) and Po on and Halpern (1971) demonstrated that a partial reinforcement schedule produces greater resistance to extinction in human subjects if it contains more trials on which the response is rewarded immediately following trials on which the response is not rewarded (N-R transitions). In addition, Meyers and Capaldi (1970) and Halpern and Poon (1971) determined that the resistance to extinction of human subjects was increased if they received more consecutive nonrewarded trials prior to rewarded trials (N-Iength) (Le., schedules which gave subjects more experience with longer N-Iengths produced greater resistance to extinction).…”