OF THE EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOR THE EFFECTS OF UNSIGNALLED DELAYED REINFORCEMENT '

Pigeons' pecks were reinforced according to a variable-interval schedule. A delay-ofreinforcement procedure was then added to the schedule, or a yoked-control procedure was arranged where the reinforcers occurred independently of responding according to the same variable-interval schedule. During the delay-of-reinforcement procedure, the first peck after a reinforcer was scheduled began a delay timer and the reinforcer was delivered at the end of the interval. No stimulus change signalled the delay interval and responses could occur during it, so that the obtained delays were often shorter than those scheduled. Responding under this procedure was highly variable but, in general, behavior was substantially reduced even with the shortest delay used, 3 sec. In addition, the rates maintained by delayed reinforcement were only slightly greater than those maintained by the yoked-control procedure, suggesting that adventitious pairings of response and reinforcer were responsible for some of the maintenance of behavior that did occur. The results challenge recent conceptions of reinforcement as involving response-reinforcer correlations and re-emphasize the role of temporal proximity between response and reinforcer.

[1]  W M Baum,et al.  The correlation-based law of effect. , 1973, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[2]  H. Rachlin,et al.  Effects of alternative reinforcement: does the source matter? , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[3]  K. Lattal Reponse-reinforcer independence and conventional extinction after fixed-interval and variable-interval schedules. , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[4]  P. Hanford,et al.  Effects of different delay of reinforcement procedures on variable-interval responding. , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[5]  R. W. Richards Reinforcement delay: some effects on behavioral contrast. , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[6]  Donald M. Wilkie Delayed reinforcement in a multiple schedule. , 1971, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[7]  R. Herrnstein On the law of effect. , 1970, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[8]  A J Neuringer,et al.  Delayed reinforcement versus reinforcement after a fixed interval. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[9]  S. H. Chung,et al.  Effects of delayed reinforcement in a concurrent situation. , 1965, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[10]  H S HOFFMAN,et al.  A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. , 1962, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[11]  P B DEWS,et al.  Free-operant behavior under conditions of delayed reinforcement. I. CRF-type schedules. , 1960, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[12]  C. B. Ferster Sustained behavior under delayed reinforcement. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[13]  W. Baum,et al.  OF THE EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOR CHOICE AS TIME ALLOCATION ' , 2006 .

[14]  R. Herrnstein,et al.  OF THE EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOR CHOICE AND DELAY OF REINFORCEMENT ' , 2006 .

[15]  Emily W. Herbert OF THE EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOR TWO-KEY CONCURRENT RESPONDING : RESPONSE-REINFORCEMENT DEPENDENCIES AND BLACKOUTS ' , 2005 .

[16]  J. Nevin Response strength in multiple schedules. , 1974, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[17]  H. Rachlin Introduction to modern behaviorism , 1970 .