The effects of shifts in delay of liquid sucrose reward in thirsty rats

Shanab, Mitri E.; Domino, Julia; Melrose, Saimi

doi:10.3758/bf03329338

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With a repeated-shifts procedure , a NCE was found with shifts in magnitude of sucrose reward (Shanab , France , & Young, 1976), as well as with shifts in delay of sucrose reward (Shanab , Domino, & Melrose , 1977), although no PCE was found in the latter study.…”

Section: California State Uni Versity Fresno California 93740mentioning

confidence: 58%

Contrast effects as a function of delay and shifts in magnitude of water reward in thirsty rats

Spencer

Shanab

1979

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: California State Uni Versity Fresno California 93740mentioning

confidence: 58%

Contrast effects as a function of delay and shifts in magnitude of water reward in thirsty rats

Spencer

Shanab

1979

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There is only one instance of a SucPCE (Sgro & Weinstock, 1963), whereas 11 studies report no SucPCE (Ferrel & Shanab, 1975; Harker, 1956; Logan, 1952;McCain et al, , 1977 McHose & Tauber, 1972;Shanab & Biller, 1972;Shanab & Cavallaro, 1975;Shanab &McCuistion, 1970;Shanab et al, 1977Shanab et al, , 1973. The 1 study which did find the SucPCE was unusual in that water was used as the reward, there was only one trial per day, and the 15 slowest rats were eliminated from the experiment.…”

Section: Shifts In Delay Of Rewardmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Five studies report a SucNCE following an increase in delay (McCain, Lobb, Almond, & Leek, 1976; McHose & Tauber, 1972; 420 FLAHERTY Shanab & Biller, 1972;Shanab, Domino, & Melrose, 1977;Shanab & McCuistion, 1970), but eight studies failed to find a SucNCE (Ferrel & Shanab, 1975; Harker, 1956; Logan, 1952; Mackintosh & Lord, 1973-two experiments;McCain, Boodee, & Lobb, 1977;Shanab, 1971;Shanab, Rouse, & Cavallaro, 1973). In addition, Spence (1956) reports the results of experiments by three of his students (as well as the Harker study cited above) which also failed to show evidence of a SucNCE subsequent to shifts in delay.…”

Section: Shifts In Delay Of Rewardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incentive contrast: A review of behavioral changes following shifts in reward

Flaherty

1982

Animal Learning & Behavior

313

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature relevant to incentive contrast effects is reviewed, with emphasis on the data published since the reviews by Black (1968) and Dunham (1968). Contrary to the evidence available for the earlier reviews, the current literature indicates that positive contrast is a reliable phenomenon. Its occurrence is facilitated by use of a constant delay of reward, use of a long runway, or possibly by a shift while a negative contrast effect, resulting from a previous shift, is still present in the animals' behavior. Positive contrast also occurs in consummatory behavior when sucrose or saccharin solutions are shifted. Conditions that are ineffective in producing positive contrast are reviewed, as are the effects of numerous variables on both successive and simultaneous contrast. In addition, positive and negative contrast effects resulting from shifts in delay or percentage of reward, contrast resulting from shifts in sucrose, saccharin, or ethanol solutions, contrast in choice behavior, and transsituational contrast are reviewed. The relationship of the data to several theoretical interpretations of contrast is also considered.Interpretation of the behavior changes that occur when a familiar reward is replaced by a novel, usually less preferred, reward has played an important role in the theoretical analysis of animal learning. For example, Tolman (1932) cited the behavior of a monkey when the familiar reward of a banana was replaced by a piece of lettuce as evidence favoring his view that animals learn expectancies of particular rewards in a learning situation. The behavioral description was obtained in a delayed-response experiment by Tinklepaugh (1928): "She [the monkey] extends her hand to seize the food. But her hand drops to the floor without touching it. She looks at the lettuce but (unless very hungry) does not touch it. She looks under and around her. She picks the cup up and examines it thoroughly inside and out. She has on occasion turned toward observers present in the room and shrieked at them in apparent anger. After several seconds spent searching, she gives a glance toward the other cup, which she has been taught not to look into, and then walks off to a nearby window. The lettuce is left untouched on the floor" (p. 224).In addition to supporting Tolman's expectancy interpretation of animal learning, this description contains elements that continue to be relevant as possible explanations of the behavioral changes that Appreciation is due Alexandra Avdzej for assistance in library research and to HowardBecker, SusanChecke, and MaryFlaherty for their comments on the manuscript. Preparation for this article was aided by grants from the Rutgers Research Council. The author's mailing addressis: Psychology Department, Busch Campus, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey08903. occur subsequent to reward shifts, that is, the apparent presence of an emotional response elicited by the shift and the possibility that the animals search for the missing reward, given the opportunity.A rat study by Elli...

show abstract

“…The reduction of contrast with repeated shifts would be expected from a variety of theoretical positions, including generalization decrement (Capaldi & Lynch, 1967), adaptation level (Bevan, 1968), and, perhaps, from positions emphasizing the possible role of neophobia in the initial response to the postshift solution (Flaherty, Lombardi, Wrightson, & Deptula, 1980). However, negative contrast has been reported following second shifts in both magnitude and delay of reward (Maxwell, Calef, Murray, Shepard, & Norville, 1976;Shanab, Domino, &Melrose, 1977), andNewberry (1976) obtained a negative contrast following a downshift in percentage of reward, but not until the third shift. In a runway study with a constant IS-sec delay of reward, Goomas (1981) found negative contrast in the first and second downshifts in magnitude of reward, but not in four subsequent downshifts.…”

Section: Repeated Successive Contrast In Consummatorymentioning

confidence: 97%

Repeated successive contrast in consummatory behavior with repeated shifts in sucrose concentration

Flaherty

Becker

Checke

1983

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contrast in consummatory behavior was investigated following repeated shifts from 32% to 4% sucrose. In Experiment 1, contrast in licking and in open-field measures of activity occurred following the second and third downshifts. In Experiments 2a and 2b, equivalent contrast effects occurred following the first and second downshifts in sucrose. In Experiment 3, negative contrast remained unabated following nine downshifts in animals shifted between 32% and 4% sucrose on alternate days. Similar results were found for five downshifts in animals shifted every 2 days. In both of these latter conditions, positive contrast occurred over the first few shifts and was then lost as the 32% control group reached asymptote. These data show that repeated negative contrast effects in consummatory behavior are robust and enduring and occur under several different sets of experimental parameters. The results are discussed in terms of reinforcement level and emotional interpretations of contrast effects, and the possibility was suggested that the causal mechanism of contrast changes with repeated shifts. Capaldi and Lynch (1967) reported that a successive negative contrast effect in runway behavior that occurred following a downshift in number of food pellets failed to recur when the animals were downshifted for a second time following a period of return to the initial reward conditions.

show abstract

The effects of shifts in delay of liquid sucrose reward in thirsty rats

Cited by 7 publications

References 33 publications

Contrast effects as a function of delay and shifts in magnitude of water reward in thirsty rats

Contrast effects as a function of delay and shifts in magnitude of water reward in thirsty rats

Incentive contrast: A review of behavioral changes following shifts in reward

Repeated successive contrast in consummatory behavior with repeated shifts in sucrose concentration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About