Literature DB >> 16812019

Parameters affecting the maintenance of negatively reinforced key pecking.

E T Gardner, P Lewis.   

Abstract

Three negative reinforcement experiments employing a key-peck response are described. In Experiment I, pigeons shocked on the average of twice per minute (imposed condition) could produce, by pecking a key, an alternate condition with correlated stimuli. Delayed shocks were added, across sessions, to the alternate condition until pecking stopped. Two of three pigeons continued to peck despite a 100% increase in shock frequency. In Experiment II, pigeons were shocked in the imposed condition four times per minute. The postresponse delay to shock was held constant by delivering, in the alternate condition, the next shock, or the next two, three, or four shocks from the imposed-condition shock schedule. All three subjects continued to peck with no change in delay to the first two postresponse shocks but with a 75% reduction in shock frequency. In Experiment III, a response produced an immediate shock followed by a shock-free period. Three of four subjects continued to respond despite reduced delay to shock. Delay-to-shock or shock-frequency reduction was sufficient to maintain key pecking, but neither was necessary. The conditions that negatively reinforce the pigeon's key peck were similar to conditions that negatively reinforce the rat's bar press.

Entities:  

Year:  1977        PMID: 16812019      PMCID: PMC1333624          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1977.28-117

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  31 in total

1.  Aversive control with the pigeon.

Authors:  H S HOFFMAN; M FLESHLER
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1959-07       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  The effects of escape conditioning and shock intensity on responding during inescapable shock.

Authors:  M P Domjan; J W Rowell
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-11       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Nondiscriminated avoidance of shock by pigeons pecking a key.

Authors:  E A Ferrari; J C Todorov; F G Graeff
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-03       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Incompatability between the pigeons' unconditioned response to shock and the conditioned key-peck response.

Authors:  R F Smith; C R Gustavson; G L Gregor
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-07       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  The discriminative control of free-operant avoidance despite exposure to shock during the stimulus correlated with nonreinforcement.

Authors:  P J Bersh; J V Lambert
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1975-01       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Integrated delays to shock as negative reinforcement.

Authors:  P Lewis; E T Gardner; L Hutton
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1976-11       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Negatively reinforced key pecking.

Authors:  P Lewis; L Lewin; M Stoyak; P Muehleisen
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-07       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Training and maintenance of keypecking in the pigeon by negative reinforcement.

Authors:  H Rachlin; P N Hineline
Journal:  Science       Date:  1967-08-25       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Effects of response-shock interval and shock intensity on free-operant avoidance responding in the pigeon.

Authors:  M Klein; M Rilling
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-09       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Characteristics and response-displacement effects of shock-generated responding during negative reinforcement procedures: pre-shock responding and post-shock aggressive responding.

Authors:  D F Hake; R L Campbell
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-05       Impact factor: 2.468

View more
  6 in total

1.  Timeout postponement without increased reinforcement frequency.

Authors:  C J Pietras; T D Hackenberg
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.468

Review 2.  Stimuli inevitably generated by behavior that avoids electric shock are inherently reinforcing.

Authors:  J A Dinsmoor
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Preference in pigeons given a choice between sequences of fixed-ratio schedules: Effects of ratio values and duration of food delivery.

Authors:  E Hall-Johnson; A Poling
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Delay or rate of food delivery as determiners of response rate.

Authors:  R L Shull; D J Spear; A E Bryson
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1981-03       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Aversive control: A separate domain?

Authors:  P N Hineline
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Choice between sequences of fixed-ratio schedules: effects of ratio values and probability of food delivery.

Authors:  A Poling; E Blakely; V Pellettiere; M Picker
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 2.468

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.