Literature DB >> 17465316

Preference for a stimulus that follows a relatively aversive event: contrast or delay reduction?

Rebecca A Singer1, Laura M Berry, Thomas R Zentall.   

Abstract

Several types of contrast effects have been identified including incentive contrast, anticipatory contrast, and behavioral contrast. Clement, Feltus, Kaiser, and Zentall (2000) proposed a type of contrast that appears to be different from these others and called it within-trial contrast. In this form of contrast the relative value of a reinforcer depends on the events that occur immediately prior to the reinforcer. Reinforcers that follow relatively aversive events are preferred over those that follow less aversive events. In many cases the delay reduction hypothesis proposed by Fantino (1969) also can account for such effects. The current experiments provide a direct test of the delay reduction and contrast hypotheses by manipulating the schedule of reinforcement while holding trial duration constant. In Experiment 1, preference for fixed-interval (FI) versus differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (DRO) schedules of reinforcement was assessed. Some pigeons preferred one schedule over the other while others demonstrated a position (side) preference. Thus, no systematic preference was found. In Experiment 2, a simultaneous color discrimination followed the FI or DRO schedule, and following training, preference was assessed by presenting the two positive stimuli simultaneously. Consistent with the contrast hypothesis, pigeons showed a significant preference for the positive stimulus that in training had followed their less preferred schedule.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17465316      PMCID: PMC1832171          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2007.39-06

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


  11 in total

1.  "Work ethic" in pigeons: reward value is directly related to the effort or time required to obtain the reward.

Authors:  T S Clement; J R Feltus; D H Kaiser; T R Zentall
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-03

2.  Behavioral contrast.

Authors:  G S REYNOLDS
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1961-01       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Discriminative stimuli that follow a delay have added value for pigeons.

Authors:  Kelly A DiGian; Andrea M Friedrich; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-10

4.  Pigeons shift their preference toward locations of food that take more effort to obtain.

Authors:  Andrea M Friedrich; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2004-11-30       Impact factor: 1.777

5.  Choice and rate of reinforcement.

Authors:  E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-09       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Auto-maintenance in the pigeon: sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement.

Authors:  D R Williams; H Williams
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-07       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Discriminative stimuli that follow the absence of reinforcement are preferred by pigeons over those that follow reinforcement.

Authors:  Andrea M Friedrich; Tricia S Clement; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.986

8.  Contrast and the justification of effort.

Authors:  Emily D Klein; Ramesh S Bhatt; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-04

Review 9.  Delay reduction: current status.

Authors:  E Fantino; R A Preston; R Dunn
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Backward conditioning: a reevaluation of the empirical evidence.

Authors:  M L Spetch; D M Wilkie; J P Pinel
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 17.737

View more
  20 in total

1.  Examination of the influence of contingency on changes in reinforcer value.

Authors:  Iser G DeLeon; Meagan K Gregory; Michelle A Frank-Crawford; Melissa J Allman; Arthur E Wilke; Abbey B Carreau-Webster; Mandy M Triggs
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2011

2.  Within-trial contrast: when is a failure to replicate not a type I error?

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Rebecca A Singer
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  The Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior at zero, fifty, and one hundred.

Authors:  A Charles Catania
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Deprivation level and choice in pigeons: a test of within-trial contrast.

Authors:  Marco Vasconcelos; Peter J Urcuioli
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.986

5.  Failure to obtain value enhancement by within-trial contrast in simultaneous and successive discriminations.

Authors:  Joana Arantes; Randolph C Grace
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.986

6.  Within-trial contrast: when you see it and when you don't.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.986

7.  Within-trial contrast: pigeons prefer conditioned reinforcers that follow a relatively more rather than a less aversive event.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Rebecca A Singer
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Extensive training is insufficient to produce the work-ethic effect in pigeons.

Authors:  Marco Vasconcelos; Peter J Urcuioli
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Preference for 50% reinforcement over 75% reinforcement by pigeons.

Authors:  Cassandra D Gipson; Jérôme J D Alessandri; Holly C Miller; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.986

10.  Within-trial contrast: The effect of probability of reinforcement in training.

Authors:  Cassandra D Gipson; Holly C Miller; Jérôme J D Alessandri; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 1.777

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.