Adjunctive Drinking in a Mixed Reinforcement Schedule: Effect of Reinforcement Magnitude on Schedule-Induced Polydipsia

1986 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 553-561 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. D. Keehn ◽  
Emoke Stoyanov
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcement Schedule ◽  
Reinforcement Magnitude ◽  
Schedule Effect

Selective Action of Pentobarbital on Component Behaviors of a Reinforcement Schedule

Science ◽  
1956 ◽  
Vol 124 (3217) ◽  
pp. 367-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. J. HERRNSTEIN ◽  
W. H. MORSE
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcement Schedule ◽  
Selective Action

“Freeloading” in a Runway as a Function of Amount of Training and Type of Reinforcement Schedule

1968 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 211-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Calvin M. Leung ◽  
Glen D. Jensen ◽  
Richard P. Tapley
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcement Schedule ◽  
Schedule Of Reinforcement ◽  
Single Pellet ◽  
Skinner Box

2 groups of 60 rats received either 75 or 285 runs in a runway before being given a choice between freeloading from a dish of pellets in the start box or running the maze for a single pellet. The 285-trial Ss showed less willingness to perform the operant than the 75-trial Ss. This is opposite to what Jensen (1963) had found in the Skinner box. Schedule of reinforcement (100 vs 50%) during training did not significantly affect freeloading scores.

Noncontingent Nonreinforcement of a Response as the Aversive Event in a Cer Paradigm

1971 ◽  
Vol 29 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1196-1198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Calef ◽  
Richard A. Kaufman ◽  
Ronald N. Bone ◽  
Steven A. Werk
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcement Schedule ◽  
Present Experiment ◽  
High Density ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Aversive Event ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Facilitation Effect ◽  
Response Facilitation ◽  
Early Training ◽  
Low Rate

The present experiment investigated the effects of noncontingent nonreinforcement as the aversive event in a CER paradigm. The results showed a significant response-facilitation effect during early training, but none during later training with a high rate-producing, high-density reinforcement schedule. The present results imply that a low rate-producing, high-density reinforcement schedule is not a necessary condition for response facilitation.

scholarly journals Reinforcement magnitude effects with overtraining

1971 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 295-297
Author(s):  
Lois Reel Hammer
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcement Magnitude

Grazing Schedule Effect on Forage Production and Nutritive Value of Diverse Forage Mixtures

2009 ◽  
Vol 101 (2) ◽  
pp. 408-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Deak ◽  
M. H. Hall ◽  
M. A. Sanderson
Keyword(s):  
Nutritive Value ◽  
Forage Production ◽  
Schedule Effect ◽  
Forage Mixtures

scholarly journals The Importance of Trials

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin Harris
Keyword(s):  
Reinforcement Schedule ◽  
Partial Reinforcement ◽  
Continuous Learning ◽  
Reinforcement History ◽  
The Us ◽  
History Information ◽  
Temporal Intervals ◽  
Learning As A Process ◽  
Stored Information ◽  
The Relationship

Many theories of conditioning describe learning as a process by which stored information about the relationship between a conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (US) is progressively updated upon each occasion (trial) that the CS occurs with, or without, the US. These simple trial-based descriptions can provide a powerful and efficient means of extracting information about the correlation between two events, but they fail to explain how animals learn about the timing of events. This failure has motivated models of conditioning in which animals learn continuously, either by explicitly representing temporal intervals between events, or by sequentially updating an array of associations between temporally distributed elements of the CS and US. Here, I review evidence that some aspects of conditioning are not the consequence of a continuous learning process but reflect a trial-based process. In particular, the way that animals learn about the absence of a predicted US during extinction suggests that they encode and remember trials as single complete episodes rather than as a continuous experience of unfulfilled expectation of the US. These memories allow the animal to recognise repeated instances of non-reinforcement and encode these as a sequence which, in the case of a partial reinforcement schedule, can become associated with the US. The animal is thus able to remember details about the pattern of a CS’s reinforcement history, information that affects how long the animal continues to respond to the CS when all reinforcement ceases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document