Literature DB >> 1774537

"Turning back the clock" on serial-stimulus sign tracking.

R W Allan1, T J Matthews.   

Abstract

Two experiments examined the effects of a negative (setback) response contingency on key pecking engendered by a changing light-intensity stimulus clock (ramp stimulus) signaling fixed-time 30-s food deliveries. The response contingency specified that responses would immediately decrease the light-intensity value, and, because food was delivered only after the highest intensity value was presented, would delay food delivery by 1 s for each response. The first experiment examined the acquisition and maintenance of responding for a group trained with the contingency in effect and for a group trained on a response-independent schedule with the ramp stimulus prior to introduction of the contingency. The first group acquired low rates of key pecking, and, after considerable exposure to the contingency, those rates were reduced to low levels. The rates of responding for the second group were reduced very rapidly (within four to five trials) after introduction of the setback contingency. For both groups, rates of responding increased for all but 1 bird when the contingency was removed. A second experiment compared the separate effects of each part of the response contingency. One group was exposed only to the stimulus setback (stimulus only), and a second group was exposed only to the delay of the reinforcer (delay only). The stimulus-only group's rates of responding were immediately reduced to moderate levels, but for most of the birds, these rates recovered quickly when the contingency was removed. The delay-only groups's rates decreased after several trials, to very low levels, and recovery of responding took several sessions once the contingency was removed. The results suggest that (a) sign-tracking behavior elicited by an added clock stimulus may be reduced rapidly and persistently when a setback contingency is imposed, and (b) the success of the contingency is due both to response-dependent stimulus change and response-dependent alterations in the frequency of food delivery. The operation of the contingency is compared with the effects of secondary reinforcement and punishment procedures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1774537      PMCID: PMC1323131          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1991.56-427

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


  15 in total

1.  Differential reinforcement and stimulus control of not responding.

Authors:  J A Nevin
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1968-11       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  "Automaintenance": the role of reinforcement.

Authors:  S R Hursh; D J Navarick; E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  The effects of reinforcement upon the prepecking behaviors of pigeons in the autoshaping experiment.

Authors:  M G Wessells
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Punishment of autoshaped key-peck responses of pigeons.

Authors:  R K Wesp; K A Lattal; A D Poling
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1977-05       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Key pecking under response-independent food presentation after long simple and compound stimuli.

Authors:  J A Ricci
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-05       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Centrifugal selection of signal-directed pecking.

Authors:  F J Barrera
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-09       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Sign-tracking with an interfood clock.

Authors:  W L Palya
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  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

9.  Punishment by response-contingent withdrawal of an imprinted stimulus.

Authors:  H S Hoffman; J W Stratton; V Newby
Journal:  Science       Date:  1969-02-14       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Food-avoidance in hungry pigeons, and other perplexities.

Authors:  R J Herrnstein; D H Loveland
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-11       Impact factor: 2.468

View more
  4 in total

1.  The spatial distribution of behavior under varying frequencies of temporally scheduled water delivery.

Authors:  E Ribes-Iñesta; C Torres
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Selective sensitivity of schedule-induced activity to an operant suppression contingency.

Authors:  R W Allan; T J Matthews
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Negative automaintenance omission training is effective.

Authors:  Federico Sanabria; Matthew T Sitomer; Peter R Killeen
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Stimulus-food pairings produce stimulus-directed touch-screen responding in cynomolgus monkeys (macaca fascicularis) with or without a positive response contingency.

Authors:  Christopher E Bullock; Todd M Myers
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.468

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.