Extinction of a running response as a function of reinforcement magnitude

Four groups of rats were trained on different sucrose solutions in a straight runway. Terminal running speed was a monotonic function of reinforcement magnitude. After training each group was subdivided, one subgroup being extinguished under spaced, the other under massed conditions. In spaced extinction the animals trained on non extreme reward magnitudes showed most resistance to extinction. It was concluded that resistance to extinction is an inverted U-shaped function of reinforcement magnitude found in training. The massed extinction trials were conducted with a very short inter-trial interval. The animals showed an immediate drop in running speed followed by a gradual recovery and a subsequent decline. The number of trials taken to reach the peak recovery speed was a function of reinforcement magnitude found in training. Results on both massed and spaced extinction trials were interpreted in terms of the facilitatory and inhibitory effects of momentary and conditioned frustration.     

Behavioral aftereffects of reinforcement and its omission as a function of reinforcement magnitude

Rats responded on a multiple fixed-interval fixed-interval schedule of reinforcement. Each complete cycle of the multiple schedule was separated from the next by a relatively long period of timeout from all schedule contingencies. A response at the end of the second component of each cycle was always reinforced with an invariant reinforcement magnitude, while reinforcement magnitude and reinforcement omission were systematically varied in the first component. Response rate in the first component was a monotonic function of reinforcement magnitude in that component. These changes in response rate in the first component did not affect response rate in the second component. When reinforcement was omitted on 50% of occasions in the first component, following reinforcement there was a reduction in response rate in the second component that was monotonically related to reinforcement magnitude. Following reinforcement omission there was an increase in response rate in the second component that was unrelated to reinforcement magnitude. When reinforcement was omitted on 100% of occasions in the first component, behavioral contrast was observed.