Reinforcement and response factors in the extinction of conditioned suppression

Byrum, Ronald P.; Jackson, Donald E.

doi:10.3758/bf03335644

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…EXPERIMENT 2 There were, however, several potentially significant methodological differences between the present study and those reported by Kamil (1969), Jackson (1970), and Byrum & Jackson (1970). Kamil maintained his Ss at a relatively high deprivation level throughout experimentation (80% of their preexperimental weight), while the others allowed their Ss to surpass preexperimental weights prior to initial CER extinction (treatment).…”

Section: Preliminary Operant Trainingcontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…Results and Discussion Figure 1 Jackson (1970) and Byrum & Jackson (1970), since there was no treatment effect during first-order extinction to es •. ·It appears, then, that response availability has no effect on acquisition of soe.…”

Section: Preliminary Operant Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the only studies to date which have manipulated response availability du ri n g CER extinction, Jackson (1970) and Byrum & Jackson (1970) found that when barpressing was possible during early CER extinction, it served to facilitate subsequent extinction. The latter study furt her indicated that reinforcement (water) was the eritical determinant of the aeeeierated extinetion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Response availability and second-order conditioned suppression

Byrum

Jackson

1971

Psychon Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following 8 CER training days, 18 rats were given second-order conditioning trials under one of two conditions. Control Ss had the response lever present during all 10 SOC days. Experimental Ss had the lever absent during the first 3 SOC days (CS, was noise, CS, was a flashing light). A second experiment with 16 rats reversed the first-and second-order stimuli and gave 5 days of SOC with the lever absent for half the Ss. In both studies, when the lever was returned for all Ss, subsequent SOC days showed no significant differences between groups with respect to either acquisition of SOC or extinction of FOC. These results offer no support to Kamil 's (1969) hypothesis that his failure to find a correspondence between first-and second-order conditioned suppression might be due to counterconditioning of CS, to the food reinforcement obtained during SOC.

show abstract

Section: Preliminary Operant Trainingcontrasting

confidence: 53%

Section: Preliminary Operant Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation