» Articles » PMID: 16812241

Preference for Signaled Versus Unsignaled Reinforcement Delay in Concurrent-chain Schedules

Overview
Date 1981 Sep 1
PMID 16812241
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A concurrent-chain schedule was employed to examine pigeons' preferences for signaled versus unsignaled delay of reinforcement in which the delay durations ranged from zero to ten seconds. In general, pigeons preferred signaled delay over unsignaled delay especially when a variable-interval 30-second schedule operated in each initial link; when a variable-interval 90-second schedule operated in each initial link, these preferences tended toward indifference or were attenuated. In addition, prior training seemed to exert partial control over behavior. Responding in the terminal link was higher under signaled delay than unsignaled delay in a majority of the cases. Moreover, response rates under signaled delay remained fairly constant whereas responding under unsignaled delay was initially high, but decreased systematically with delay durations as short as 2.5 seconds. These results are consistent with a number of other studies demonstrating the significant role of a signal for impending positive stimuli.

Citing Articles

Preference for less segmented fixed-time components in concurrent-chain schedules of reinforcement.

Leung J, Winton A J Exp Anal Behav. 1986; 46(2):175-83.

PMID: 16812458 PMC: 1348284. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1986.46-175.


Handling time and choice in pigeons.

Shettleworth S J Exp Anal Behav. 1985; 44(2):139-55.

PMID: 16812429 PMC: 1348173. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1985.44-139.


Preference for unsegmented interreinforcement intervals in concurrent chains.

Leung J, Winton A J Exp Anal Behav. 1985; 44(1):89-101.

PMID: 16812428 PMC: 1348163. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1985.44-89.


Incentive theory: II. Models for choice.

Killeen P J Exp Anal Behav. 1982; 38(2):217-32.

PMID: 16812299 PMC: 1347819. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1982.38-217.

References
1.
Davison M, Hunter I . Concurrent schedules: undermatching and control by previous experimental conditions. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979; 32(2):233-44. PMC: 1332898. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1979.32-233. View

2.
Catania A, Reynolds G . A quantitative analysis of the responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968; 11(3):Suppl:327-83. PMC: 1338497. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-s327. View

3.
Chung S . Effects of delayed reinforcement in a concurrent situation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1965; 8(6):439-44. PMC: 1338130. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1965.8-439. View

4.
Ferster C . Sustained behavior under delayed reinforcement. J Exp Psychol. 1953; 45(4):218-24. DOI: 10.1037/h0062158. View

5.
Herrnstein R . Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961; 4:267-72. PMC: 1404074. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-267. View