Abstract
The role of trial offset in omission training was studied in hooded rats using two types of omission training procedures. In both procedures a lever contact during a trial canceled food delivery at the end of the trial. In one omission procedure trials were of fixed duration (15 sec), whereas in the second omission procedure a lever contact terminated the trial (retracted the lever). Each omission subject was yoked with a second subject. Additional groups of rats were exposed to one of two types of random control procedures. In one random control procedure a contact with the lever terminated the trial, and in a second procedure trial duration was fixed. Higher response probabilities were generated by the omission procedure in which trials were terminated by lever contacts than by the fixed-trial omission procedure. No differences were observed between the two random control procedures.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Brownstein, A. J., & Balsam, P. D. A search for conditioned reinforcement effects in negative automaintenance of key pecking. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1975, 6, 165–168.
Fleshler, M., & Hoffman, H. S. A progression for generating variable interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1962, 5, 529–530.
Gamzu, E., & Schwam, E. Autoshaping and automaintenance of the key-press response in squirrel monkeys. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1974, 21, 361–372.
Gray, J. A. Elements of a two-process theory of learning. London: Academic Press, 1975.
Griffin, R. W., & Rashotte, M. E. A note on the negative automaintenance procedure. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1973, 2, 402–404.
Hearst, E., & Jenkins, H. M. Sign tracking: The stimulus-reinforcer relation and direction action. Austin, Tex: Psychonomic Society, 1974.
Herrnstein, R. J., & Loveland, D. Food avoidance in hungry pigeons and other perplexities. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1972, 18, 369–383.
Hursh, S. R., Navarick, D. J., & Fantino, E. “Automaintenance”: The role of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1974, 21, 117–124.
Jenkins, H. M. Sensitivity of different response systems to stimulus-reinforcer and response-reinforcer relations. In H. David & H. M. B. Hurwitz (Eds.), Operant-Pavlovian interactions. Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1977.
Locurto, C, Terrace, H. S., & Gibbon, J. Autoshaping, random control, and omission training in the rat. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1976, 26, 451–462.
Peterson, M. R., Lyon, D. O., Stone, W., & Scott, W. The role of conditioned reinforcement in the acquisition and maintenance of omission responding. Psychological Record, 1977, 27, 235–254.
Powell, R. W., & Kelly, W. Responding under positive and negative response contingencies in pigeons and crows. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1976, 25, 219–225.
Rescorla, R. A. Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychological Review, 1967, 74, 71–80.
Schwartz, B. The role of positive conditioned reinforcement in the maintenance of key pecking which prevents the delivery of primary reinforcement. Psychonomic Science, 1972, 28, 277–278.
Schwartz, B., & Williams, D. R. The role of the response-reinforcer contingency in negative automaintenance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1972, 17, 351–357.
Siegel, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
Stiers, M., & Silberberg, A. Lever-contact responses in rats: Automaintenance with and without a negative response-reinforcer dependency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1974, 22, 497–506.
Williams, D. R., & Williams, H. Automaintenance in the pigeon: Sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1969, 12, 511–520.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was performed while the first author was a postdoctoral research associate in the Stimulus Control Laboratory, Columbia University (H. S. Terrace, Director). It was, in part, supported by grants from the National Science Foundation (GB 03781 and GB 34095) and the National Institute of Health (HD 00930). Portions of this paper were presented at the meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, New York, New York, 1975.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Locurto, C.M., Terrace, H.S. & Gibbon, J. Omission training (negative automaintenance) in the rat: Effects of trial offset. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 12, 11–14 (1978). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329610
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329610