DOES CONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT STRENGTHEN OPERANT BEHAVIOR?

In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained to peck keys with equal food-reinforcement schedules in components that ended with either noncontingent or contingent transitions to a third component with a five-fold richer schedule. Response rates were higher in the initial component with contingent transitions, but resistance to prefeeding or extinction was not consistently greater. Experiment 2 also included noncontingent or contingent transitions to a signaled period of nonreinforcement. There was no effect of the contingency on transitions to nonreinforcement, but the difference in response rates maintained by contingent versus noncontingent transitions to the richer schedule was replicated. In addition, response rates were higher in components that preceded nonreinforcement than in components that preceded the richer schedule. However, resistance to extinction was greater for noncontingent transitions to the richer schedule than to nonreinforcement, implicating stimulus–reinforcer relations in the determination of resistance to change. Resistance to change was also somewhat greater for noncontingent than for contingent transitions to the richer schedule. The latter result, together with the results of Experiment 1 and related research, suggests that response-contingent reinforcement does not increase resistance to change.     

IS BAR-HOLDING WITH NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT PREPARATORY OR PERSEVERATIVE?

Three of four white rats learned to press first one bar and then another to escape or avoid electric shocks. Cumulative bar-holding-time records showed that holding occurred frequently on the second bar but hardly ever on the first, indicating that bar-holding is more "perserverative" than "preparatory". The response chain, first-bar press second-bar press, was more easily established by a forward than by a backward chaining procedure.     

EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVE REINFORCEMENT: DOES THE SOURCE MATTER?1

In a chamber with a single response key, pigeon's key pecks were reinforced with food according to a variable-interval schedule. In addition, extra reinforcements occurred concurrently according to an independent schedule. In one condition, availability of the extra reinforcements was signalled by a change in key color from white to red. The extra reinforcements occurred after a peck on the red key. In a second condition, the extra reinforcements were unsignalled and occurred only after a 2-sec pause in pecking for one group of subjects and were unsignalled and occurred freely as scheduled for another group of subjects. In the first two conditions, duration of reinforcement was varied. A third condition duplicated the second but varied rate rather than duration of reinforcement. The rate of pecking varied inversely with the amount of extra reinforcement per unit time according to the same function, regardless of the condition regulating occurrence of the extra reinforcements, and regardless of whether or not a 2-sec pause was required for their occurrence. The shape of this function was predicted by Herrnstein's (1970) matching law.     

DOES SENSITIVITY TO MAGNITUDE DEPEND ON THE TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTION OF REINFORCEMENT?

Our research addressed the question of whether sensitivity to relative reinforcer magnitude in concurrent chains depends on the distribution of reinforcer delays when the terminal-link schedules are equal. In Experiment 1, 12 pigeons responded in a two-component procedure. In both components, the initial links were concurrent variable-interval 40-s variable-interval 40-s, and the terminal links were both 20-s interval schedules in which responses were reinforced by either 4-s of grain in one, or 2-s of grain in the other. The only difference between the components was whether the terminal-link schedules were fixed interval or variable intervals. For all subjects, the relative rate of responding in the initial links for the terminal link that produced the 4-s reinforcer was greater when the terminal links were fixed-interval schedules than when they were variable-interval schedules. This result is contrary to the prediction of Grace's (1994) contextual choice model, but is consistent with both Mazur's (2001) hyperbolic value-added model and Killeen's (1985) incentive theory. In Experiment 2, 4 pigeons responded in a concurrent-chains procedure in which 4-s or 2-s reinforcers were provided independently of responding according to equal fixed-time or mixed-time schedules. Preference for the 4-s reinforcer increased as the variability of the intervals comprising the mixed-time schedules was decreased. Generalized-matching sensitivity of initial-link response allocation to relative reinforcer magnitude was proportional to the geometric mean of the terminal-link delays.     

ALTERNATIVE REINFORCEMENT INCREASES RESISTANCE TO CHANGE: PAVLOVIAN OR OPERANT CONTINGENCIES?

Two multiple-schedule experiments with pigeons examined the effect of adding food reinforcement from an alternative source on the resistance of the reinforced response (target response) to the decremental effects of satiation and extinction. In Experiment 1, key pecks were reinforced by food in two components according to variable-interval schedules and, in some conditions, food was delivered according to variable-time schedules in one of the components. The rate of key pecking in a component was negatively related to the proportion of reinforcers from the alternative (variable-time) source. Resistance to satiation and extinction, in contrast, was positively related to the overall rate of reinforcement in the component. Experiment 2 was conceptually similar except that the alternative reinforcers were contingent on a specific concurrent response. Again, the rate of the target response varied as a function of its relative reinforcement, but its resistance to satiation and extinction varied directly with the overall rate of reinforcement in the component stimulus regardless of its relative reinforcement. Together the results of the two experiments suggest that the relative reinforcement of a response (the operant contingency) determines its rate, whereas the stimulus-reinforcement contingency (a Pavlovian contingency) determines its resistance to change.     

DOES FUNCTIONAL COMMUNICATION TRAINING COMPETE WITH ONGOING CONTINGENCIES OF REINFORCEMENT? AN ANALYSIS DURING RESPONSE ACQUISITION AND MAINTENANCE

We examined the effectiveness of functional communication training (FCT) in reducing self-injurious behavior (SIB) and in shaping an alternative (communicative) response while SIB continued to be reinforced. Following a functional analysis of 3 individuals' SIB, we attempted to teach an alternative response consisting of a manual sign to each individual, using the reinforcer that maintained SIB. When FCT was implemented without extinction, SIB remained at baseline rates for all participants, and none of the participants acquired the alternative response. When extinction was added to the training procedure, SIB decreased and manual signing increased for all participants. To determine if signing, when established, would compete with SIB when both were reinforced, extinction was then withdrawn. Signing was maintained and SIB occurred at low rates for 2 individuals, but SIB returned to baseline rates for the 3rd individual, necessitating the reimplementation of extinction. These results suggest that it may be difficult to establish alternative behaviors if inappropriate behavior continues to be reinforced, but that, when established, alternative behavior might compete successfully with ongoing contingencies of reinforcement for inappropriate behavior.     

NATURAL LAWS AND DIVINE INTERVENTION: WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES BEING PENTECOSTAL OR CHARISMATIC MAKE?

The question about divine action remains contested in the discussion between theology and science. This issue is further exacerbated with the entry of pentecostals and charismatics into the conversation, especially with their emphases on divine intervention and miracles. I explore what happens at the intersection of these discourses, identifying first how the concept of “laws of nature” has developed in theology and science and then probing what pentecostal‐charismatic insights might add into the mix. Drawing from the triadic and evolutionary metaphysics of Charles Sanders Peirce, I propose a reconsideration of the “laws of nature” as habitual, dynamic, and general but nevertheless real tendencies through which the Holy Spirit invites the world to inhabit the coming kingdom of God. This proposal contributes to the articulation of an authentic Pentecostal‐charismatic witness at the theology‐and‐science table while also enabling a more plausible and coherent account of divine action for pentecostal‐charismatic piety and Christian practice in the twenty‐first century.     

WHEN DOES MORALITY WIN?

I describe a case involving two countries at war, Benevolentia and Malevoran. Malevoran is an unjust aggressor, which does not follow the requirements of the prevailing morality of warfare. The leadership and army of Benevolentia closely follow those requirements, and as a direct result Benevolentia loses. I claim that this is a reductio of the prevailing morality of warfare: in the victory of Malevoran over Benevolentia morality has lost. I draw some tentative conclusions concerning the morality of warfare, and urge that we need to gain a richer understanding of what it means for morality to win, see this as a distinct and important moral consideration, and think afresh how morality can triumph much more often.     

INTERNISTS OF THE MIND OR PHYSICIANS OF THE SOUL: DOES PSYCHIATRY NEED A PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY?

Although psychiatry is interested in what both body and mind contribute to behavior, it sometimes emphasizes one more than the other. Since the early 1980s, American psychiatry has shifted its interest from mind and psyche to body and brain. Neuroscience and psychopharmacology are increasingly at the core of psychiatry. Some experts claim that psychiatry is no longer interested in problems in living and positive goals such as mental health, happiness, and morality but rather has narrowed its focus to mental disorders addressed with psychotropic drugs. In view of this trend, psychiatry needs to confront two questions in social philosophy. If it is no longer directly concerned with health and happiness, how does it relate to these positive goals? And how does it relate as a medical institution to religious institutions, schools, and other organizations that directly promote health, happiness, morality, and the purposes of life? It is not enough for psychiatry to renounce its moral role; its practices still shape cultural values. Psychiatry should take more responsibility for developing a public philosophy that addresses these issues.     

FRIENDLY OR SEXY?

A set of three studies replicated and extended Abbey's (1982) research, indicating that men perceive less friendliness, but more sexuality than women when observing women's social interactions. Study 1 was based on 49 previously unacquainted male-female pairs who engaged in brief face-to-face discussions, and 48 males and 61 females who observed one of those discussions. Study 2 was based on videotaped exchanges between a male store manager and a female cashier, and Study 3 between a male professor and a female student; 75 males and 88 females participated in Study 2, while 98 males and 102 females participated in Study 3. In all three studies, the men saw less friendliness, but more sexiness in the woman's behavior than the women. These results support the idea that some of the less severe forms of sexual harassment in business and academic settings may be better understood eventually through research and theory development that considers these sex differences in social perceptions.     

FORBIDDEN OR FORGIVEN?

This article describes a conceptual framework with which to study rape cross-societally. The model considers the powerful effects of social norms in condoning certain types of rape. It also distinguishes clearly between rape and sex by making the absence of female choice the fundamental factor in defining rape. Using this conceptual model as a guide, rape is examined in a random sample of 35 world societies. Rape is not a forbidden behavior; this research demonstrates the masking effects of social norms that tend to institutionalize rape within various social customs or rituals. The concept of a rape-free culture was not supported; rape was found in all the sample societies once the definition of rape was broadened to include socially condoned rapes. The presence of both normative (condoned) and nonnormative (uncondoned) rapes in a majority of the societies studied illustrates that rape is regulated rather than prohibited. Implications for defining and studying rape in the United States are discussed.     

DOES THE SUPERVENIENCE ARGUMENT GENERALIZE?

We evaluate the scope of Jaegwon Kim's “supervenience argument” for reduction. Does its conclusion apply only to psychology, or does it generalize to all the special sciences? The claim that the supervenience argument generalizes to all the special sciences if it goes through for psychology is often raised as an objection to the supervenience argument. We argue that this objection is ambiguous. We distinguish three readings of it and suggest that some of them make it a plausible claim, whereas other readings make it implausible. We suggest that this ambiguity is the result of picturing the world as being hierarchically organized in levels, with the domain of physics at the bottom and the domains of the social sciences at the top. The plausibility of the objection depends on how we think of this picture. This popular picture, we suggest, involves three different dimensions along which reduction may occur.     

DOES DESCARTES DENY CONSCIOUSNESS TO ANIMALS?

Contrary to longstanding opinion, Descartes does not deny all feeling and awareness to non‐human animals. Though he undoubtedly denies that animals think, a case can be made that he nonetheless would allow them organism consciousness, perceptual consciousness, access consciousness and even phenomenal consciousness. Descartes does not employ or accept an ‘all‐or‐nothing’ view of consciousness. He merely denies (not that this is a small thing) that animals have the capacity for self‐conscious reflective reception or awareness of sensations and feelings.     

DOES NATURE NEED TO BE REDEEMED?

Abstract. In the light of evolutionary biology, the biblical idea that nature fell with the coming of human sin is incredible. Biblical writers, classical theologians, and contemporary biologists are ambivalent about nature, finding in natural history both a remarkable genesis of life and also much travail and suffering. Earth is a land of promise, and there is the conservation, or redemption, of life in the midst of its perpetual perishing. Life is perennially a struggling through to something higher. In that sense even natural history is cruciform, though human sinfulness introduces novel tragedy. Humans now threaten creation; nature is at more peril than ever before.