Abstract
Catania’s version of Herrnstein’s response-reinforcement input-output function is derived from two assumptions about reinforcement: (1) that reinforcers excite responses upon which they are contingent in proportion to the reinforcement, and (2) that reinforcers inhibit all responding in proportion to the reinforcementand in proportion to ongoing responding. In choice situations, unlike Herrnstein’s interpretation of the ro parameter, these assumptions predict the empirical matching law without first assuming it. The additional assumptions of exponential growth of a reinforcer’s strength over a fixed interval, and of proportionate timing of intervals, lead to a mathematical description of fixed-interval responding. The fixed-interval scallop results from the simultaneous growth of the reinforcer’s excitatory and inhibitory functions. An attempt is made to derive variable-interval schedule performance from the fixed-interval case.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ambler, S. A comparison of two models for performance under fixed interval schedules of reinforcement.Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1976,14, 53–71.
Baum, W. M. On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1974,22, 231–242.
Catania, A. C. Concurrent performances: Reinforcement interaction and response independence.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1963,6, 253–263. (a)
Catania, A. C. Concurrent performances: A baseline for the study of reinforcement magnitude.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1963,6, 299–300. (b)
Catania, A. C. Reinforcement schedules and psychophysical judgments. In W. N. Schoenfeld (Ed.)The theory of reinforcement schedules. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970.
Catania, A. C. Self-inhibiting effects of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1973,19, 517–526.
Catania, A. C., &Reynolds, G. S. A quantitative analysis of the responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1968,11, 327–383.
Chung, S.-H., &Herrnstein, R. J. Choice and delay of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1967,10, 67–74.
XXXdeVilliers, P. Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.),Handbook of operant behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall, 1977.
XXXdeVilliers, P. A., &Herrnstein, R. J. Toward a law of response strength.Psychological Bulletin, 1976,83, 1131–1153.
Dews, P. B. 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, 1969,12, 191–199.
Dews, P. B. The theory of fixed-interval responding. In W. N. Schoenfeld (Ed.),The theory of reinforcement schedules. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970.
Dukich, T. D., &Lee, A. E. A comparison of measures of responding under fixed-interval schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1973,20, 281–290.
Farmer, J. Properties of behavior under random interval reinforcement schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1963,6, 607–616.
Gibbon, J. Scalar expectancy theory and Weber’s law in animal training.Psychological Review, 1977,84, 279–325.
Hawkes, L., &Shimp, C. P. Reinforcement of behavioral patterns: Shaping a scallop.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1975,23, 3–16.
Herrnstein, R. J. Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1961,4, 267–272.
Herrnstein, R. J. On the law of effect.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1970,13, 243–266.
Herrnstein, R. J. Formal properties of the matching law.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1974,21, 159–164.
Herrnstein, R. J., &Heyman, G. M. Is matching compatible with reinforcement maximization on concurrent variable interval, variable ratio?Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1979,31, 209–223.
Jenkins, H. M. Sequential organization in schedules of reinforcement. In W. N. Schoenfeld (Ed.),The theory of reinforcement schedules. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970.
Killeen, P. The matching law.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1973,17, 489–495.
Killeen, P. On the temporal control of behavior.Psychological Review, 1975,82, 89–115.
Luck, R. D. The choice axiom after twenty years.Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1977,15, 215–233.
McDowell, J. J., &Kessel, R. A multivariate rate equation for variable-interval performance.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1979,31, 267–283.
Millenson, J. R. Random interval schedules of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1963,6, 437–443.
Nevin, J. A. On the form of the relation between response rates in a multiple schedule.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1974,21, 237–248.
Pear, J. J. Implications of the matching law for ratio responding.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1975,23, 139–140.
Rachlin, H. C. On the tautology of the matching law.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1971,15, 249–251.
Rachlin, H. C. A molar theory of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1978,30, 345–360.
Schneider, B. A. A two-state analysis of fixed-interval responding in the pigeon.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1969,12, 677–687.
Staddon, J. E. R. On Herrnstein’s equation and related forms.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1977,28, 163–170.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Keller, K.J. Inhibitory effects of reinforcement and a model of fixed-interval performances. Animal Learning & Behavior 8, 102–109 (1980). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209736
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209736