Literature DB >> 20676265

Human responding on random-interval schedules of response-cost punishment: the role of reduced reinforcement density.

Cynthia J Pietras1, Andrew E Brandt, Gabriel D Searcy.   

Abstract

An experiment with adult humans investigated the effects of response-contingent money loss (response-cost punishment) on monetary-reinforced responding. A yoked-control procedure was used to separate the effects on responding of the response-cost contingency from the effects of reduced reinforcement density. Eight adults pressed buttons for money on a three-component multiple reinforcement schedule. During baseline, responding in all components produced money gains according to a random-interval 20-s schedule. During punishment conditions, responding during the punishment component conjointly produced money losses according to a random-interval schedule. The value of the response-cost schedule was manipulated across conditions to systematically evaluate the effects on responding of response-cost frequency. Participants were assigned to one of two yoked-control conditions. For participants in the Yoked Punishment group, during punishment conditions money losses were delivered in the yoked component response independently at the same intervals that money losses were produced in the punishment component. For participants in the Yoked Reinforcement group, responding in the yoked component produced the same net earnings as produced in the punishment component. In 6 of 8 participants, contingent response cost selectively decreased response rates in the punishment component and the magnitude of the decrease was directly related to the punishment schedule value. Under punishment conditions, for participants in the Yoked Punishment group response rates in the yoked component also decreased, but the decrease was less than that observed in the punishment component, whereas for participants in the Yoked Reinforcement group response rates in the yoked component remained similar to rates in the no-punishment component. These results provide further evidence that contingent response cost functions similarly to noxious punishers in that it appears to suppress responding apart from its effects on reinforcement density.

Entities:  

Keywords:  humans; random-interval schedules; response-cost punishment; response-independent punishment; yoked-control procedure

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20676265      PMCID: PMC2801542          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2010.93-5

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


  31 in total

1.  Stimulus control and generalization of point-loss punishment with humans.

Authors:  J O'Donnell; J Crosbie; D C Williams; K J Saunders
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Some effects of response cost upon human operant behavior.

Authors:  H WEINER
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1962-04       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  A progression for generating variable-interval schedules.

Authors:  M FLESHLER; H S HOFFMAN
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1962-10       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Fixed-ratio punishment.

Authors:  N H AZRIN; W C HOLZ; D F HAKE
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1963-04       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Behavioral contrast.

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

6.  A comparison of the punishing effects of response-produced shock and response-produced time out.

Authors:  D E McMillan
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1967-09       Impact factor: 2.468

Review 7.  Is time-out from positive reinforcement an aversive event? A review of the experimental evidence.

Authors:  H Leitenberg
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1965-12       Impact factor: 17.737

8.  Response suppression and recovery under some temporally defined schedules of intermittent punishment.

Authors:  D P Ferraro
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1967-08

9.  Punishment in human choice: direct or competitive suppression?

Authors:  Thomas S Critchfield; Elliott M Paletz; Kenneth R MacAleese; M Christopher Newland
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Punishment-specific effects of pentobarbital: dependency on the type of punisher.

Authors:  M N Branch; G Nicholson; S I Dworkin
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1977-11       Impact factor: 2.468

View more
  2 in total

1.  Loss Aversion Reflects Information Accumulation, Not Bias: A Drift-Diffusion Model Study.

Authors:  Summer N Clay; John A Clithero; Alison M Harris; Catherine L Reed
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-10-10

2.  Evaluating Extinction, Renewal, and Resurgence of Operant Behavior in Humans with Amazon Mechanical Turk.

Authors:  Carolyn M Ritchey; Toshikazu Kuroda; Jillian M Rung; Christopher A Podlesnik
Journal:  Learn Motiv       Date:  2021-05-13
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.