Abstract
Four groups of 10 rats each were given six acquisition trials (Phase 1) under continuous reinforcement (CR), partial reinforcement (PR), constant delay (CD), or partial delay of reinforcement (PD) conditions. In Phase 2, all Ss were given 18 nonreinforced trials, followed by 12 continuously reinforced trials in Phase 3. In Phase 4, all Ss were given 12 more extinction trials. A constant 24-h ITI was observed throughout the experiment. A strong partial reinforcement extinction effect (PREE) was obtained in both Phases 2 and 4. Only a temporary partial delay of reinforcement effect (PDRE) was observed, which was restricted to the first nine trials of the first extinction phase. No constant delay of reinforcement effect (CDRE) was observed in either extinction phase. The results were discussed in terms of both frustration and sequential theories.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amsel, A. Partial reinforcement effects on vigor and persistence: Advances in frustration theory derived from a variety of within-subject experiments. In K. W. Spence and J. T. Spence (Eds.),The psychology of learning and motivation. Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 1967. Pp. 1–65.
Amsel, A., Hug, J. J., & Surridge, C. T. Number of food pellets, goal approaches, and the partial reinforcement extinction effect after minimal acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 77, 530–534.
Amsel, A., Wong, P. T. P., & Traupmann, K. L. Short-term and long-term factors in extinction and durable persistence. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971, 90, 90–95.
Campbell, P. E., & Knouse, S. B. Extinction following delayed reward: A review. Psychonomic Monograph Supplements, 1972, 4(15, Whole No. 63).
Capaldi, E. J. A sequential hypothesis of instrumental learning. In K. W. Spence and J. T. Spence (Eds.),The psychology of learning and motivation. Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 1967. Pp. 67–156.
Couch, J. V., & Stanley, L. R. Consistent delay of reward vs consistent nonreward in the alley. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 9, 497–498.
Howlett, J. C., & Sheldon, M. H. Effects of partial delay of reinforcement following a small number of acquisition trials. Psychonomic Science, 1968, 11, 259.
Logan, F. A.Incentive. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1960.
McCain, G., & Bowen, J. Pre- and post-reinforcement delay with a small number of acquisition trials. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 7, 121–122.
Robbins, D. Partial reinforcement: A selective review of the alleyway literature since 1960. Psychological Bulletin, 1971, 76, 415–431.
Surridge, C. T., Mock, K. R., & Amsel, A. Effect of interpolated extinction after partial delay of reward training on subsequent reacquisition and extinction. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 20, 321–328.
Traupmann, K. L., & Wong, P. T. P. The small-trial PREE and interpolated CRF training. Psychonomic Science, 1971, 23, 207–208.
Traupmann, K. L., Wong, P. T. P., & Amsel, A. Durability of persistence as a function of number of partially reinforced trials. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971, 88, 372–375.
Wike, E. L., & McWilliams, J. Duration of delay, delay-box confinement, and runway performance. Psychological Reports, 1967, 21, 865–870.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shanab, M.E., Birnbaum, D.W. Durability of the partial reinforcement and partial delay of reinforcement extinction effects after minimal acquisition training. Animal Learning & Behavior 2, 81–85 (1974). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199126
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199126