Abstract
In two experiments, rats were trained initially on a recycling conjunctive schedule in which a food pellet was delivered after 30 s provided at least one response had occurred; otherwise the next cycle began immediately. This produced low rate responding characterized by either a pause-respond-pause pattern or else a pause-respond pattern. The schedule then was changed so that half of the intervals ended with the presentation of a brief stimulus instead of food. Patterning after food was little affected, whereas patterning after the brief stimulus varied across rats. Generally, a short pause after the brief stimulus was followed by an initial increase in responding that led to either a fairly constant rate, or else to a decrease in rate throughout the interval. In later conditions, when the incidence of response-food and response- stimulus contiguity were manipulated separately, only the former increased response rate; this was so even when the brief stimulus was paired with food in some conditions. Rate increases were accompanied by changes in patterning across all intervals. These results do not support a simple conditioned reinforcement interpretation of the control acquired by a brief stimulus on a second-order schedule with fixed-interval components. Rather, they suggest that a number of interrelated variables combine to maintain responding. These variables include response-reinforcer contiguity, the temporal location of the response dependency, and the contingency between the brief stimulus and the reinforcer.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
BYRD, L. D., & MARR, M. J. (1969). Relations between patterns of responding and the presentation of stimuli under second-order schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 713–722.
COHEN, S. L., CALISTO, G., & LENTZ, B. E. (1979). Separating the reinforcing and discriminative properties of brief-stimulus presentation in second-order schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32, 149–156.
COHEN, S. L., & STUBBS, D. A. (1976). Discriminative properties of briefly presented stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 25, 15–25.
COLLIER, G. H. (1983). Life in a closed economy: The ecology of learning and motivation. In M. D. Zeiler & P. Harzem (Eds.), Advances in analysis of behavior: Vol. 3. Biological factors in learning (pp. 223–274). Chichester, England: Wiley.
CUMMING, W. W., & SCHOENFELD, W. N. (1958). Behavior under extended exposure to a high value fixed-interval reinforcement schedule. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1, 245–263.
DAVEY, G. (1987). Animal learning and conditioning. London: Macmillan Education.
DE LORGE, J. (1967). Fixed-interval behavior maintained by conditioned reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior; 10, 271–276.
DE LORGE, J. (1969). The influence of pairing with primary reinforcement on the maintenance of conditioned reinforcement in second-order schedules. In D. P. Hendry (Ed.), Conditioned reinforcement (pp. 61–90). Homewood, Il: Dorsey Press.
DE LORGE, J. (1971). The effects of brief stimuli presented under a multiple schedule of second-order schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 15, 19–23.
DEWS, P. B. (1969). Studies on responding under fixed-interval schedules of reinforcement: The effects on the pattern of responding of changes in requirements at reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 191–199.
KEENAN, M. (1982). Behavioural organisation in schedules of reinforcement Unpublished dissertation. New University of Ulster.
KEENAN, M. (1986). Second-order schedules. The Psychological Record, 36, 407–417.
KEENAN, M., & LESLIE, J. C. (1984). Separating response dependency and response-reinforcer contiguity in a recycling conjunctive schedule. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 41, 203–210.
KEENAN, M., & LESLIE, J. C. (1986). Varying response-reinforcer contiguity in a recycling conjunctive schedule. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 45, 317–332.
KEENAN, M., & WATT, A. A. (1990). Concurrent behavior and response-reinforcer contiguity. The Psychological Record, 40, 127–138.
KELLEHER, R. T. (1966a). Chaining and conditioned reinforcement. In W. K. Honig (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application (pp. 160–212). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
KELLEHER, R. T. (1966b). Conditioned reinforcement in second-order schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 475–485.
LEIGLAND, S. (1989). A functional analysis of mentalistic terms in human observers. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 7, 5–18.
MACKINTOSH, N. J. (1983). Conditioning and associative learning. Oxford: Clarendon Press
MALAGODI, E. F., DE WEESE, J., & JOHNSTON, J. M. (1973). Second-order schedules: A comparison of chained, brief-stimulus, and tandem procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 20, 447–460.
MARR, M. J. (1969). Second-order schedules. In D. P. Hendry (Ed.), Conditioned reinforcement (pp. 37–60). Homewood, Il: Dorsey Press.
MARR, M. J. (1979). Second-order schedules and the generation of unitary response sequences. In M. D. Zeiler & P. Harzem (Eds.), Reinforcement and the organization of behavior (pp. 223–260). New York: John Wiley.
MORRIS, E. K. (1988). Contextualism: The world view of behavior analysis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 46, 289–323.
MORSE, W. H., & KELLEHER, R. T. (1977). Determinants of reinforcement and punishment. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 174–200). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
RAY, R. D., & DELPRATO, D. J. (1989). Behavioral systems analysis: Methodological strategies and tactics. Behavioral Science, 34, 81–127.
ROBERTS, S. (1981). Isolation of an internal clock. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 7, 242–268.
ROSE, J. E., & FANTINO, E. (1978). Conditioned reinforcement and discrimination in second-order schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 393–418.
ROYALTY, P., WILLIAMS, B. A., & FANTINO, E. (1987). Effects of delayed conditioned reinforcement on chain schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 47, 41–56.
SCHNEIDER, B. A. (1969). A two-state analysis of fixed-interval responding in the pigeon. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 677–688.
SCHWARTZ, B. (1984). Psychology of learning and behavior (2nd ed). New York: W. W. Norton.
SKINNER, B. F. (1966). What is the experimental analysis of behavior? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 213–218.
SQUIRES, N. K., NORBORG, J., & FANTINO, E. (1975). Second-order schedules: Discrimination of components. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 24, 157–171.
STUBBS, D. A. (1971). Second-order schedules and the problem of conditioned reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 16, 289–313.
STUBBS, D. A., & COHEN, S. L. (1972). Second-order schedules: Comparison of different procedures for scheduling paired and nonpaired brief stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 18, 403–413.
STUBBS, D. A., & SILVERMAN, P. J. (1972). Second-order schedules: Brief shock at the completion of each component. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 17, 201–212.
TARPY, R. M. (1982). Principles of animal learning and motivation. Glenview, Il: Scott, Foresman and Company.
WEARDEN, J. H., & MCSHANE, B. (1988). Interval production as an analogue of the peak procedure: Evidence for similarity of human and rat timing processes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 408, (4), 363–375.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
We thank Susan Barnes for her help in the preparation of this manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Keenan, M., Toal, L. Periodic Reinforcement and Second-Order Schedules. Psychol Rec 41, 87–115 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395096
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395096