Is extinction the hallmark of operant discrimination? Reinforcement and S(Delta) effects.

Matthew E Andrzejewski, Curtis D Ryals, Sean Higgins, Jennifer Sulkowski, Janice Doney, Ann E Kelley, Philip J Bersh
Author Information
  1. Matthew E Andrzejewski: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53719, USA. mandrzejewsk@wisc.edu

Abstract

Using a successive discrimination procedure with rats, three experiments investigated the contribution of reinforcement rate and amount of S(Delta) exposure on the acquisition of an operant discrimination. S(D) components and were always 2 min in length, while S(Delta) (extinction) components were either 1 min or 4 min in length; responses in S(D) were reinforced on one of four schedules. In Experiment 1, each of eight groups were exposed to one possible combination of rate of reinforcement and S(Delta) component length. At every level of reinforcement, the 4 min S(Delta) groups acquired the discrimination more quickly. However, within each level of reinforcement, the proportions of responding in S(D) as a function cumulative S(Delta) exposure were equivalent, regardless of the number of reinforcers earned in S(D), suggesting that extinction is the "hallmark" of discrimination. Experiment 2 sought to replicate these results in a within-subjects design, and although the 4 min S(Delta) conditions always produced superior discriminations, the lack of discriminated responding in some conditions suggested that stimulus disparity was reduced. Experiment 3 clarified those results and extended the finding that the acquisition of operant discrimination closely parallels extinction of responding in S(Delta). In sum, it appears that higher reinforcement rates and longer S(Delta) exposure facilitate the acquisition of discriminated operant responding.

References

  1. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Jan;5:19-31 [PMID: 13905772]
  2. Psychol Bull. 1965 Nov;64(5):365-76 [PMID: 5851543]
  3. Behav Brain Res. 2002 Nov 15;136(2):339-48 [PMID: 12429395]
  4. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 Sep;7:369-80 [PMID: 14218295]
  5. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Jul;12(4):551-9 [PMID: 16811374]
  6. Science. 1963 Oct 18;142(3590):412-3 [PMID: 14056717]
  7. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999 May;71(3):439-82 [PMID: 16812904]
  8. Ann Neurosci. 2010 Jul;17(3):136-41 [PMID: 25205891]
  9. Behav Anal. 1995 Spring;18(1):51-68 [PMID: 22478204]
  10. Psychol Rev. 1952 Jan;59(1):89-93 [PMID: 14912194]
  11. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Jan;6:1-27 [PMID: 13980667]

Grants

  1. DA016465-01/NIDA NIH HHS
  2. R01 DA004788/NIDA NIH HHS
  3. F32 DA016465/NIDA NIH HHS
  4. R37 DA004788/NIDA NIH HHS
  5. DA004788-18/NIDA NIH HHS
  6. F32 DA016465-02/NIDA NIH HHS
  7. F32 DA016465-03/NIDA NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Animals
Behavior, Animal
Conditioning, Operant
Discrimination Learning
Extinction, Psychological
Male
Rats
Rats, Long-Evans
Rats, Sprague-Dawley
Reinforcement, Psychology

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0SDeltadiscriminationreinforcementminoperantDextinctionrespondingexposureacquisitionlength4Experimentratecomponentsalways21onegroupslevelresultsconditionsdiscriminatedUsingsuccessiveprocedureratsthreeexperimentsinvestigatedcontributionamounteitherresponsesreinforcedfourscheduleseightexposedpossiblecombinationcomponenteveryacquiredquicklyHoweverwithinproportionsfunctioncumulativeequivalentregardlessnumberreinforcersearnedsuggesting"hallmark"soughtreplicatewithin-subjectsdesignalthoughproducedsuperiordiscriminationslacksuggestedstimulusdisparityreduced3clarifiedextendedfindingcloselyparallelssumappearshigherrateslongerfacilitatehallmarkdiscrimination?Reinforcementeffects

Similar Articles

Cited By