Control of preference in children by conditioned positive reinforcement

A preference measure was employed with children to evaluate the conditioned positive reinforcing function of a stimulus that preceded reinforcement. A match-to-sample procedure was arranged in which subjects could respond to either the form or color dimension of a compound sample stimulus. Intermittent token reinforcement was provided equally for color and form matches. Two stimuli were employed (Stimulus A and Stimulus B), each consisting of a distinctive tone and colored light. One of these stimuli (the paired stimulus) preceded each token delivery, and the other did not (nonpaired stimulus). The paired stimulus was dependent upon each response to one match dimension, and the nonpaired stimulus followed each response to the other dimension. Three of the five subjects responded primarily to the dimension that was followed by the paired stimulus. This effect was obtained regardless of which stimulus (A or B) was paired and on which match dimension (color or form) the paired stimulus was dependent. These results were unaltered by discontinuing the nonpaired stimulus. The other two subjects demonstrated consistent preferences for the form dimension and Stimulus A, respectively.     

Effects of reinforcement magnitude on pigeons' preference for different fixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement

In concurrent, two-member chains, the completion of one or the other of two initial percentage fixed-interval 90-sec links produced a terminal link in which the completion of a fixed ratio produced food reinforcement. The fixed ratios and the duration of reinforcement in the terminal links were varied. Relative response rate in initial links was proportional to the relative reinforcement duration per ratio response (reinforcement duration divided by fixed ratio) in terminal links. The rate of responding in the terminal fixed-ratio links was insensitive to both ratio size and reinforcement duration and therefore did not vary sufficiently to distinguish between responses per reinforcement and immediacy of reinforcement as controlling variables in terminal links.     

Relative preference for external and self-controlled reinforcement in monkeys

Monkeys were tested for their relative preference for self-monitored and externally imposed systems of reinforcement. One monkey clearly preferred to self-reward his own performances. whereas a second monkey favored slightly the externally administered system but displayed a small gradual shift toward self-reward as the sessions progressed. Unlike previous findings. unmerited self-reward did not result in rapid discarding of self-imposed performance requirements. The level of work output and the interactive effects of multiple reinforcement control are possible operative factors in sustaining self-imposed contingencies long after punishment for unmerited self-reward has been discontinued.     

Self-control and the preference for delayed reinforcement an example in brain injury

We investigated the effects of a concurrent physical therapy activity (keeping the hand open) during delays to reinforcement in an adult man with acquired brain injuries. Once a relatively stable level of hand-open behavior was obtained, the participant was asked to choose between a small immediate reinforcer and a larger delayed reinforcer contingent on keeping the hand open at greater-than-baseline duration. Afterwards, the participant was asked to select between a larger delayed reinforcer with no hand-open requirement and the identical larger delayed reinforcer with a progressively increasing hand-open requirement. Results suggest a shift in preference to larger delayed reinforcers and an eventual preference for the hand-open requirement option.     

Establishing preference for unreliable reinforcement in adults with dual diagnoses

We evaluated the choice responding of three adults dually diagnosed with developmental and psychiatric disabilities using concurrent schedules of reinforcement. Specifically, participants were given a choice between a response option resulting in reliable reinforcement and a response option resulting in unreliable reinforcement. Our primary purpose was to shift preference from reliable to unreliable reinforcement via the systematic presentation of stimuli during delay intervals. A second purpose was to evaluate the effectiveness of intervening stimuli in shifting preference at differing delay-to-reinforcement intervals. Preference for unreliable reinforcement was first examined in the absence of stimulus presentations during delays, at three different delay values. Next, we aimed to establish preference for unreliable reinforcement by presenting pictures of reinforcers during delays preceding unreliable reinforcement. Preference was again examined at three different delay values. In the absence of stimulus presentations during delays, participants were shown to prefer reliable reinforcement, particularly at the longer delay value. When stimuli were presented during the delays, two of the three participants preferred unreliable reinforcement, particularly the longer the delay value. These results suggest that the presentation of intervening stimuli during delays may help facilitate tolerance for unreliable reinforcement.     

Time-based and count-based measurement of preference

Rats' pressing on two levers was reinforced according to two independent variable-interval schedules that were varied during the experiment. Since the levers were connected directly to the programming equipment, bypassing the standard pulseformers, reinforcement could occur while a lever was held down. Although the time a lever was pressed might, therefore, have varied independently of number of presses, these two measures covaried substantially, because the average duration of the presses remained roughly constant. This rough invariance may have resulted from the rats' tendency to make bursts of brief presses (i.e., to jiggle the levers), even though the contingencies encouraged holding. When duration did vary, presses on the two levers tended to vary together. As a result, relative time spent pressing corresponded closely to relative number of presses. Both of these measures conformed well to the matching law. Absolute behavioral frequency at a lever, measured either way, varied directly with proportion of reinforcement for that lever, in accordance with the generalized version of the matching law. Number of presses seemed, on balance, to be a slightly more reliable measure than pressing time. The substantial interchangeability may prove more significant than the slight disparity, however, because it supports the notion that all behavior can be measured on a common scale of time.     

The paradox of preference for unreliable reinforcement: The role of context and conditioned reinforcement

We discuss Belke and Spetch's (1994) work on choice between reliable and unreliable reinforcement. The studies by Belke and Spetch extend a line of basic research demonstrating that under certain experimental conditions in a concurrent chains procedure, pigeons prefer an alternative that produces unreliable reinforcement. The authors describe the variables that influence preference for unreliable reinforcement, including the signaling and the duration of the reinforcement schedules, the context in which the signaling stimuli occur, and the effects of conditioned reinforcement. Hypothetical applied examples that address these variables are provided, and their influence on preference for unreliable reinforcement in humans is discussed. We conclude by suggesting a line of applied research to examine the relationship between these variables and a preference for unreliable reinforcement.     

Timeout postponement without increased reinforcement frequency

Three experiments were conducted to examine pigeons' postponement of signaled extinction periods (timeouts) from a schedule of food reinforcement when such responding neither decreased overall timeout frequency nor increased the overall frequency of food reinforcement. A discrete-trial procedure was used in which a response during the first 5 s of a trial postponed an otherwise immediate 60-s timeout to a later part of that same trial but had no effect on whether the timeout occurred. During time-in periods, responses on a second key produced food according to a random-interval 20-s schedule. In Experiment 1, the response-timeout interval was 45 s under postponement conditions and 0 s under extinction conditions (responses were ineffective in postponing timeouts). The percentage of trials with a response was consistently high when the timeout-postponement contingency was in effect and decreased to low levels when it was discontinued under extinction conditions. In Experiment 2, the response-timeout interval was also 45 s but postponement responses increased the duration of the timeout, which varied from 60 s to 105 s across conditions. Postponement responding was maintained, generally at high levels, at all timeout durations, despite sometimes large decreases in the overall frequency of food reinforcement. In Experiment 3, timeout duration was held constant at 60 s while the response-timeout interval was varied systematically across conditions from 0 s to 45 s. Postponement responding was maintained under all conditions in which the response-timeout interval exceeded 0 s (the timeout interval in the absence of a response). In some conditions of Experiment 3, which were designed to control for the immediacy of food reinforcement and food-correlated (time-in) stimuli, responding postponed timeout but the timeout was delayed whether a response occurred or not. Responding was maintained for 2 of 3 subjects, suggesting that behavior was negatively reinforced by timeout postponement rather than positively reinforced by the more immediate presentation of food or food-correlated (time-in) stimuli.     

Dual effects on choice of conditioned reinforcement frequency and conditioned reinforcement value

Pigeons were presented with a concurrent‐chains schedule in which the total time to primary reinforcement was equated for the two alternatives (VI 30 s VI 60 s vs. VI 60 s VI 30 s). In one set of conditions, the terminal links were signaled by the same stimulus, and in another set of conditions they were signaled by different stimuli. Choice was in favor of the shorter terminal link when the terminal links were differentially signaled but in favor of the shorter initial link (and longer terminal link) when the terminal links shared the same stimulus. Preference reversed regularly with reversals of the stimulus condition and was unrelated to the discrimination between the two terminal links during the nondifferential stimulus condition. The present results suggest that the relative value of the terminal‐link stimuli and the relative rate of conditioned reinforcer presentation are important influences on choice behavior, and that models of conditioned reinforcement need to include both factors.     

Efficacy of and preference for reinforcement and response cost in token economies

Researchers have shown that both differential reinforcement and response cost within token economies are similarly effective for changing the behavior of individuals in a group context (e.g., Donaldson, DeLeon, Fisher, & Kahng, 2014; Iwata & Bailey, 1974). In addition, these researchers have empirically evaluated preference for these procedures. However, few previous studies have evaluated the individual effects of these procedures both in group contexts and in the absence of peers. Therefore, we replicated and extended previous research by determining the individual effects and preferences of differential reinforcement and response cost under both group and individualized conditions. Results demonstrated that the procedures were equally effective for increasing on‐task behavior during group and individual instruction for most children, and preference varied across participants. In addition, results were consistent across participants who experienced the procedures in group and individualized settings.     

Relationship between response rate and reinforcement frequency in variable-interval schedules: the effect of the concentration of sucrose reinforcement

Four rats were exposed to variable-interval schedules specifying a range of different reinforcement frequencies, using sucrose of two different concentrations and distilled water as the reinforcer. With sucrose, the rates of responding of all four rats were increasing negatively accelerated functions of reinforcement frequency, the data conforming closely to Herrnstein's equation; this was also true of the data from three of the four rats when distilled water was used as the reinforcer. The values of both constants in Herrnstein's equation were related to the sucrose concentration: the asymptotic response rate decreased, and the reinforcement frequency corresponding to the half-maximal response rate increased, with decreasing sucrose concentration.     

Effects of a history of differential reinforcement on preference for choice

The effects of a history of differential reinforcement for selecting a free-choice versus a restricted-choice stimulus arrangement on the subsequent responding of 7 undergraduates in a computer-based game of chance were examined using a concurrent-chains arrangement and a multiple-baseline-across-participants design. In the free-choice arrangement, participants selected three numbers, in any order, from an array of eight numbers presented on the computer screen. In the restricted-choice arrangement, participants selected the order of three numbers preselected from the array of eight by a computer program. In initial sessions, all participants demonstrated no consistent preference or preference for restricted choice. Differential reinforcement of free-choice selections resulted in increased preference for free choice immediately and in subsequent sessions in the absence of programmed differential outcomes. For 5 participants, changes in preference for choice were both robust and lasting, suggesting that a history of differential reinforcement for choice may affect preference for choice.     

Choice behavior in transition: development of preference for the higher probability of reinforcement.

Ten acquisition curves were obtained from each of 4 pigeons in a two-choice discrete-trial procedure. In each of these 10 conditions, the two response keys initially had equal probabilities of reinforcement, and subjects' choice responses were about equally divided between the two keys. Then the reinforcement probabilities were changed so that one key had a higher probability of reinforcement (the left key in half of the conditions and the right key in the other half), and in nearly every case the subjects developed a preference for this key. The rate of acquisition of preference for this key was faster when the ratio of the two reinforcement probabilities was higher. For instance, acquisition of preference was faster in conditions with reinforcement probabilities of .12 and .02 than in conditions with reinforcement probabilities of .40 and .30, even though the pairs of probabilities differed by .10 in both cases. These results were used to evaluate the predictions of some theories of transitional behavior in choice situations. A trial-by-trial analysis of individual responses and reinforcers suggested that reinforcement had both short-term and long-term effects on choice. The short-term effect was an increased probability of returning to the same key on the one or two trials following a reinforcer. The long-term effect was a gradual increase in the proportion of responses on the key with the higher probability of reinforcement, an increase that usually continued for several hundred trials.     

Learning processes in matching and oddity: the oddity preference effect and sample reinforcement

Eight pigeons learned either matching (to sample) or oddity (from sample) with or without reward for sample responding. The training stimuli were coarse-white, fine-black, or smooth-mauve gravels in pots with buried grain as the reinforcer. Oddity without sample reward was learned most rapidly, followed by matching with sample reward, oddity with sample reward, and matching without sample reward. Transfer was related to acquisition rate: The oddity group without sample reward showed full (equal to baseline) color and texture transfer; the matching group with sample reward showed partial texture transfer; other groups showed no transfer. Sample reward was shown to determine rate of acquisition of matching and oddity and the oddity preference effect. The results are discussed in terms of item-specific associations operating early in learning prior to any relational learning between sample and comparison stimuli.