Resistance to change of responding maintained by unsignaled delays to reinforcement: a response-bout analysis.

Christopher A Podlesnik, Corina Jimenez-Gomez, Ryan D Ward, Timothy A Shahan
Author Information
  1. Christopher A Podlesnik: Department of Psychology, 2810 Old Main Hill, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA. capodlesnik@cc.usu.edu

Abstract

Previous experiments have shown that unsignaled delayed reinforcement decreases response rates and resistance to change. However, the effects of different delays to reinforcement on underlying response structure have not been investigated in conjunction with tests of resistance to change. In the present experiment, pigeons responded on a three-component multiple variable-interval schedule for food presented immediately, following brief (0.5 s), or following long (3 s) unsignaled delays of reinforcement. Baseline response rates were lowest in the component with the longest delay; they were about equal with immediate and briefly delayed reinforcers. Resistance to disruption by presession feeding, response-independent food during the intercomponent interval, and extinction was slightly but consistently lower as delays increased. Because log survivor functions of interresponse times (IRTs) deviated from simple modes of bout initiations and within-bout responding, an IRT-cutoff method was used to examine underlying response structure. These analyses suggested that baseline rates of initiating bouts of responding decreased as scheduled delays increased, and within-bout response rates tended to be lower in the component with immediate reinforcers. The number of responses per bout was not reliably affected by reinforcer delay, but tended to be highest with brief delays when total response rates were higher in that component. Consistent with previous findings, resistance to change of overall response rate was highly correlated with resistance to change of bout-initiation rates but not with within-bout responding. These results suggest that unsignaled delays to reinforcement affect resistance to change through changes in the probability of initiating a response bout rather than through changes in the underlying response structure.

References

  1. J Exp Anal Behav. 2005 May;83(3):201-19 [PMID: 16047606]
  2. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jul;22(1):73-81 [PMID: 16811789]
  3. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 May;57(3):301-16 [PMID: 1602269]
  4. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Mar;13(2):243-66 [PMID: 16811440]
  5. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Jan;27(1):119-25 [PMID: 16811969]
  6. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 May;37(3):407-16 [PMID: 16812275]
  7. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 May;21(3):389-408 [PMID: 16811752]
  8. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Oct;5:529-30 [PMID: 13945507]
  9. J Exp Anal Behav. 2002 Jul;78(1):95-116 [PMID: 12144313]
  10. J Exp Anal Behav. 1998 Jan;69(1):29-47 [PMID: 9465412]
  11. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Sep;34(2):207-17 [PMID: 16812187]
  12. J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 May;53(3):359-79 [PMID: 2341820]
  13. J Exp Anal Behav. 2004 Jul;82(1):21-35 [PMID: 15484869]
  14. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 Jul;76(1):43-74 [PMID: 11516115]
  15. Behav Brain Sci. 2000 Feb;23(1):73-90; discussion 90-130 [PMID: 11303339]
  16. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Jan;39(1):49-59 [PMID: 16812312]
  17. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Nov;26(3):441-9 [PMID: 16811959]
  18. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Sep;30(2):169-75 [PMID: 16812096]
  19. J Exp Anal Behav. 1998 Mar;69(2):103-22 [PMID: 9540229]
  20. J Exp Anal Behav. 2005 Jul;84(1):99-110 [PMID: 16156139]
  21. Behav Processes. 2004 Jun 30;66(3):173-87 [PMID: 15157971]
  22. J Exp Anal Behav. 2002 Sep;78(2):127-60 [PMID: 12216975]
  23. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Mar;49(2):249-63 [PMID: 16812539]
  24. J Exp Anal Behav. 2005 Jan;83(1):31-45 [PMID: 15762379]
  25. J Exp Anal Behav. 2004 Jan;81(1):65-83 [PMID: 15113134]
  26. J Exp Anal Behav. 2002 May;77(3):211-31 [PMID: 12083677]
  27. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Nov;12(6):861-74 [PMID: 16811415]
  28. J Exp Anal Behav. 2004 Mar;81(2):155-67 [PMID: 15239490]
  29. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999 Jul;72(1):81-96 [PMID: 16812911]
  30. Behav Processes. 2002 Apr 28;57(2-3):187-198 [PMID: 11947997]
  31. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 Mar;35(2):145-52 [PMID: 16812205]
  32. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 May;75(3):247-74 [PMID: 11453618]
  33. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 May;57(3):267-87 [PMID: 1602267]
  34. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Apr;6(2):237-46 [PMID: 16811278]
  35. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Nov;32(3):341-62 [PMID: 16812155]
  36. J Exp Anal Behav. 1998 May;69(3):247-61 [PMID: 16812876]
  37. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Sep;60(2):345-59 [PMID: 16812702]
  38. J Exp Anal Behav. 2003 Sep;80(2):159-71 [PMID: 14674726]
  39. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 Sep;76(2):195-215 [PMID: 11599639]

MeSH Term

Animals
Behavior, Animal
Columbidae
Environment
Feeding Behavior
Reaction Time
Reinforcement, Psychology
Time Perception

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0responsedelaysrateschangeresistanceunsignaledreinforcementrespondingunderlyingstructurecomponentboutwithin-boutdelayedfoodfollowingbriefsdelayimmediatereinforcersResistancelowerincreasedinitiatingtendedchangesPreviousexperimentsshowndecreasesHowevereffectsdifferentinvestigatedconjunctiontestspresentexperimentpigeonsrespondedthree-componentmultiplevariable-intervalschedulepresentedimmediately05long3Baselinelowestlongestequalbrieflydisruptionpresessionfeedingresponse-independentintercomponentintervalextinctionslightlyconsistentlylogsurvivorfunctionsinterresponsetimesIRTsdeviatedsimplemodesinitiationsIRT-cutoffmethodusedexamineanalysessuggestedbaselineboutsdecreasedschedulednumberresponsesperreliablyaffectedreinforcerhighesttotalhigherConsistentpreviousfindingsoverallratehighlycorrelatedbout-initiationresultssuggestaffectprobabilityrathermaintainedreinforcement:response-boutanalysis

Similar Articles

Cited By (11)