Abstract
After responding was maintained on multiple variable-interval schedules of reinforcement, a signaling procedure was added to one component. The signaling procedure consisted of illuminating the key, the only source of illumination in the chamber, only when responding would be reinforced (probability of signaled reinforcement equals 1.00). Rate of responding in the unchanged component increased. When an equal number of “unreinforced” signals were added to the existing schedule (probability of signaled reinforcement equals.50), responding in the unchanged component increased further for two birds. Obtained rates of reinforcement were equal throughout the experiment.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
AMSEL, A. The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situations. Psychological Bulletin, 1958, 55, 102-119.
BLOOMFIELD, T. M. Frustration, preference, and behavioural contrast. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967, 19, 166–169.
BLOOMFIELD, T. M. Behavioural contrast and the peak shift. In R. M. Gilbert and N. S. Sutherland (Eds.), Animal discrimination learning. New York: Academic Press, 1969. Pp. 000–000.
BOWER, G., McLEAN, J., & MEACHAM, J. Value of knowing when reinforcement is due. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology, 1966, 62, 184–192.
BRETHOWER, D. M., & REYNOLDS, G. S. A facilitative effect of punishment on unpunished behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1962, 5, 191–199.
BROWNSTEIN, A. J., & HUGHES, R. G. The role of response suppression in behavioral contrast: Signaled reinforcement. Psychonomic Science, 1970, 18, 50–52.
FERSTER, C. B. & SKINNER, B. F. Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957.
HUGHES, R. G. The effects of signaled reinforcement in multiple schedules of reinforcement. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 1970.
KELLEHER, R. T., & GOLLUB, L. R. A review of positive conditioned reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1962, 5, 543–597.
LANDER, D. G., & IRWIN, R. J. Multiple schedules: Effects of the distribution of reinforcements between components on the distribution of responses between components. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1968, 11, 517–524.
REYNOLDS, G. S. Behavioral contrast. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1961, 4, 57–71.
SCHUSTER, R. H. A functional analysis of conditioned reinforcement. In D. P. Hendry (Ed.), Conditioned reinforcement. Homewood, Ill: Dorsey, 1969. Pp. 000–000.
SIDMAN, M. Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books, 1960.
STADDON, J. E. R., & INNIS, N. K. An effect analogous to “frustration” on interval reinforcement schedules. Psychonomic Science, 1966, 4, 287–288.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Research conducted at the University of Maryland. Supported by USPHS Grant No. MH-01604-13 from the National Institute of Mental Health to the University of Maryland.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hughes, R.G. Probability of signaled reinforcement in multiple variable-interval schedules. Psychon Sci 22, 57–59 (1971). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335938
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335938