Reinforcement delay: A selective review of the last decade.

Tarpy, Roger M.; Sawabini, Frederick L.

doi:10.1037/h0037428

Cited by 82 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 89 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As with other behavioral variables, similar effects have been found using the methods of the experimental analysis of behavior and using traditional research designs (e.g., Renner, 1964;Tarpy & Sawabini, 1974). The focus of these latter designs, however, has been primarily on the effects of reinforcement delay on acquisition and extinction, whereas the former has been on response maintenance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

Signal Functions in Delayed Reinforcement

Lattal

1984

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments were conducted with pigeons to examine the role of the signal in delayof-reinforcement procedures. In the first, a blackout accompanying a period of nonreinforcement increased key-peck response rates maintained by immediate reinforcement. The effects of dissociating the blackout from the delay interval were examined in the second experiment. In three conditions, blackouts and unsignaled delays were negatively correlated or occurred randomly with respect to one another. A signaled delay and an unsignaled delay that omitted the blackouts were studied in two other conditions. All delay-ofreinforcement conditions generally produced response rates lower than those produced by immediate reinforcement. Signaled delays maintained higher response rates than did any of the various unsignaled-delay conditions, with or without dissociated blackouts. The effects of these latter conditions did not differ systematically from one another. The final experiment showed that response rates varied as a function of the frequency with which a blackout accompanied delay intervals. By eliminating a number of methodological difficulties present in previous delay-of-reinforcement experiments, these results suggest the importance of the signal in maintaining responding during delay-of-reinforcement procedures and, conversely, the importance of the delay interval in decreasing responding. question. Ferster (1953) reported that response-dependent and response-independent blackouts of the same duration and frequency as those accompanying the delay interval during signaled delays of reinforcement had no systematic effect on responding when imposed during an immediate-reinforcement variable-interval (VI) schedule. Chung (1965) studied the effect of signaled delays (blackouts) of different durations occurring during one component of a concurrent VI VI schedule. The second component arranged an identical schedule except that the response-produced blackouts accompanied periods of nonreinforcement. Response rates were lower in the signaled-delay component, leading Chung to conclude that blackouts uncorrelated with delays did not affect response rates as much as did signaled delays of reinforcement. Pearce and Hall (1978, Exp. 2) compared the response rates of groups of rats maintained under either a VI schedule or a VI schedule that included response-produced 500-ms light flashes uncorrelated with reinforcement with that maintained by a VI schedule with a 500-ms !39 1984) 42, [239][240][241][242][243][244][245][246][247][248][249][250][251][252][253] NUMBER 2 (SEPTEMBER)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

Signal Functions in Delayed Reinforcement

Lattal

1984

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, a secondary reinforcer could provide immediate reinforcement and thus generate in C animals, but not in R subjects, the same behavioral outcomes that are normally associated with immediate primary reinforcement. It is well known, for example, that a brief cue occurring between the response and delayed reward facilitates delayed-reward performance (see Tarpy & Sawabini, 1974, for a review). Third, a secondary reinforcer could bridge the temporal gap between the response and food in the same way that intervening cues operate in conventional Pavlovian conditioning experiments to produce a stronger response-reinforcer association (see Rescorla, 1982).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of signaled reward in instrumental conditioning: Enhanced learning on DRL and DRH schedules of reinforcement

Tarpy

Roberts

1985

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of signaled reward were examined using DRL and DRH schedules of reinforcement. In each case, one group of rats received a brief cue between the reinforced response and the reward, and a second group received brief cues at random times. With the DRL schedule (Experiment 1), signaled reward decreased response rate, increased response efficiency (number of responses per reinforcer), and increased resistence to satiation relative to the control group. With the DRH schedule (Experiment 2), signaled reward increased response rate, efficiency, and resistance to satiation. These results refute an overshadowing explanation of the effects of signaled reward and suggest that food-correlated cues enhance learning ofthe reinforcement contingencies.Animals that respond on a variable-interval (VI) schedule of reinforcement and are given a brief cue prior to the delivery of reward respond at a much lower rate than control subjects which receive their brief cues independent of reward. This phenomenon was discovered by Pearce and Hall (1978) and St. Claire-Smith (1979) and has been the subject

show abstract

“…Indeed, decades of research on operant learning have demonstrated that behavior is most effectively reinforced when knowledge of the desired response is provided immediately after the response occurs (e.g., Perin, 1943;Pubols, 1958;Tarpy & Sawabini, 1974). Interestingly however, research using cognitive tasks has found that immediate feedback is not always best.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Waiting for feedback helps if you want to know the answer: the role of curiosity in the delay-of-feedback benefit

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When participants answer a test question and then receive feedback of the correct answer, studies have shown that the feedback is more effective when it is delayed by several seconds rather than provided immediately (e.g., Brackbill & Kappy, Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 55, 14-18, 1962; Schroth, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 17, 78-82, 1992). Despite several demonstrations of this delay-of-feedback benefit, a theoretical explanation for this finding has not yet been developed. The present study tested the hypothesis that brief delays of feedback are beneficial because they encourage anticipation of the upcoming feedback. In Experiment 1, participants answered obscure trivia questions, and before receiving the answer, they rated their curiosity to know the answer. The answer was then provided either immediately or after a 4-s delay. A later final test over the same questions revealed a significant delay-of-feedback benefit, but only for items that had been rated high in curiosity. Experiment 2 replicated this same effect and showed that the delay-of-feedback benefit only occurs when feedback is provided after a variable, unpredictable time duration (either 2, 4, or 8 s) rather than after a constant duration (always 4 s). These findings demonstrate that the delay-of-feedback effect appears to be greatest under conditions in which participants are curious to know the answer and when the answer is provided after an unpredictable time interval.

show abstract

Reinforcement delay: A selective review of the last decade.

Cited by 82 publications

References 89 publications

Signal Functions in Delayed Reinforcement

Signal Functions in Delayed Reinforcement

Effects of signaled reward in instrumental conditioning: Enhanced learning on DRL and DRH schedules of reinforcement

Waiting for feedback helps if you want to know the answer: the role of curiosity in the delay-of-feedback benefit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About