Reinforcement of human observing behavior by a stimulue correlated with extinction or increased effort

Young men pulled a plunger on mixed and multiple schedules in which periods of variable-interval monetary reinforcement alternated irregularly with periods of extinction (Experiment 1), or in which reinforcement was contingent on different degrees of effort in the two alternating components (Experiment 2). In the baseline conditions, the pair of stimuli correlated with the schedule components could be obtained intermittently by pressing either of two observing keys. In the main conditions, pressing one of the keys continued to produce both discriminative stimuli as appropriate. Pressing the other key produced only the stimulus correlated with variable-interval reinforcement or reduced effort; presses on this key were ineffective during periods of extinction or increased effort. In both experiments, key presses producing both stimuli occurred at higher rates than key presses producing only one, demonstrating enhancement of observing behavior by a stimulus correlated with the less favorable of two contingencies. A control experiment showed that stimulus change alone was not an important factor in the maintenance of the behavior. These findings suggest that negative as well as positive stimuli may play a role in the conditioned reinforcement of human behavior.     

Effect of effort and latent extinction on resistance to extinction

Sixty-four male Wistar rats were given acquisition training in an enclosed straight-alley runway which could be adjusted for angles of inclination. The 2×2×2 design involved two angles of inclination in acquisition (0° and 40°) and two angles of inclination in extinction (0° and 40°). Between acquisition and extinction, half the subjects were exposed to a latent extinction procedure and half served as controls. Number of responses in a 30-min extinction session was an inverse function of effort required in extinction. Additionally, latent extinction procedures resulted in reduced resistance to extinction, but only when the effort conditions of acquisition and extinction were constant. When the effort conditions of acquisition and extinction were dissimilar, latent extinction procedures resulted in increased resistance to extinction. The results raise questions about the nature of the learning which occurs during latent extinction training.     

Distal cues and latent extinction

The Psychological Record - The hypothesis was tested that the failure of Bugelski et al (1952) to obtain latent extinction effects in a “replication” of Seward and Levy’s (1949)...     

Acquisition and extinction in autoshaping

C. R. Gallistel and J. Gibbon (2000) presented quantitative data on the speed with which animals acquire behavioral responses during autoshaping, together with a statistical model of learning intended to account for them. Although this model captures the form of the dependencies among critical variables, its detailed predictions are substantially at variance with the data. In the present article, further key data on the speed of acquisition are used to motivate an alternative model of learning, in which animals can be interpreted as paying different amounts of attention to stimuli according to estimates of their differential reliabilities as predictors.     

Stability and variability in extinction

Some studies have found that extinction leaves response structures unaltered; others have found that response variability is increased. Responding by Long-Evans rats was extinguished after 3 schedules. In one, reinforcement depended on repetitions of a particular response sequence across 3 operanda. In another, sequences were reinforced only if they varied. In the third, reinforcement was yoked: not contingent upon repetitions or variations. In all cases, rare sequences increased during extinction--variability increased--but the ordering of sequence probabilities was generally unchanged, the most common sequences during reinforcement continuing to be most frequent in extinction. The rats' combination of generally doing what worked before but occasionally doing something very different may maximize the possibility of reinforcement from a previously bountiful source while providing necessary variations for new learning.