Reinforced practice and reduction of different kinds of fears in adults and children

The purpose of this study was to determine whether or not fears with different origins, course and chronicity could be reduced by a common treatment program. A number of therapeutic procedures that had been experimentally demonstrated to be individually important in prior behavior modification studies with neurotic disorders were combined into a single therapeutic program called ‘reinforced practice.’ The combined elements were: graduated and repeated practice in approaching actual phobic stimuli: reinforcement for gains in performance; feedback of measurable progress; and instructions designed to arouse expectations of gradual success. In each of four experiments involving four different fears, namely fear of heights, snakes and electric shock in adults, and fear of darkness in young children, Ss who expeienced the ‘reinforced practice’ procedure improved their performance by a significant and substantial margin as compared to untreated control Ss. These results suggest that regardless of different etiologies, regardless of whether or not the fears are ‘rational’ or ‘irrational,’ and regardless of whether or not the fears are transitory or long lasting, the same treatment procedure can be equally effective in reducing escape-avoidance behavior.     

Training child abusers in the use of positive reinforcement practices

A parent training program involving reading assignments, practice assignments, role-playing and contingent reinforcement was implemented for two parents identified as child abusers. Measures selected from the Patterson Coding System served as the dependent variables. Several constructive changes in parent-child interactions were observed, some of which were maintained for as long as five months post-training.     

Response elimination in rats with schedules of omission training, including yoked and response-independent reinforcement comparisons

After rats were trained to lever press, response elimination began with factorial combinations of fixed vs variable and adjusting vs constant omission training schedules. A time interval scheduling reinforcement remained the same in a constant schedule, and its length was increased as response rate declined in the adjusting schedule. A variable time (VT) response-independent reinforcement schedule followed response elimination to test the durability of response cessation. Experiment I included groups whose reinforcement was yoked to that received by the omission schedule groups. Rate of response elimination was faster with an adjusting than a constant schedule, and slightly faster with a variable than a fixed schedule. There were no significant differences in rate of response elimination between omission schedule and yoked groups. Shorter delay of reinforcement tended to increase rate of response elimination. In the subsequent VT durability test all groups displayed near-zero response rates. In Experiment II adjusting fixed and variable omission schedules, including yoked groups, were compared with fixed time (FT) and VT reinforcement schedules. Response elimination was slower in the FT and VT groups, and they responded more in a subsequent VT durability test. It was concluded that differential reinforcement of other behavior fails to account for these omission training effects, and suggestions were made for an analysis based on the correlation between response and reinforcement rate.     

Differential reinforcement of interresponse times with controlled probability of reinforcement per response

Pigeons were presented food after interresponse times (IRTs) longer or shorter than a fixed percentage of their most recent IRTs. This procedure controlled probability of reinforcement per response while still allowing different classes of IRTs to be reinforced differentially. Support was found for IRT-reinforcement theory in that response rates were determined by the degree and direction of differential reinforcement of IRTs, but were relatively independent of probability of reinforcement per response and of the length of the control system's IRT memory. Stimulus control of these differential response rates was also demonstrated.     

Reinforcement rate and force proportional reinforcement

The research examines the consequences of making two reinforcement contingencies simultaneously available for the same bar-pressing response. Specifically, two experiments are described which concern the effects of reinforcement rate upon force proportional reinforcement (FPR). In Experiment 1, reinforcement rate was constrained by combining differential reinforcement of low rate with a force-proportional reinforcement contingency. The group of rats exposed to this regimen eventually showed a significant increase in response force compared to control groups. Experimental vs control response rates were not significantly different. In Experiment 2, reinforcement rate was affected through the expedient of relating the probability of obtaining a single pellet to the response force. The group for which the probability-force relationship was discontinuous came to exert higher forces than either a group for which the relationship was fairly continuous or an ordinary variable ratio control group. Response rate was significantly higher for the control group.     

Quasireinforcement: Control of behavior by second-order interval schedules

Pigeons were trained on a variable-interval 66-sec schedule of reinforcement that was segmented into either fixed- or variable-interval 10-sec components. Three-second access to food followed some components according to the overall VI 66-sec schedule, but 3-sec periods of nonreinforcement followed the other components. With both FI 10-sec and VI 10-sec segments, overall response rates were generally higher when the completion of unreinforced segments was signaled by a red key (never paired with food) than when it was unsignaled. Response rates during the red-key periods dropped to zero. Brief presentations of the red key engendered the distinctive (FI or VI) patterns of responding which would be expected if each segment were followed by food. These data demonstrate behavioral control by brief stimuli which are not paired with primary reinforcement and show that such control may develop even when the sequences of behavior required to produce food or brief stimuli are variable in duration.     

Effects of dominance cues on attributions of sexual behavior

Many writers have suggested that dominance plays an important role in human sexuality. This proposition was examined by asking 51 females and 85 males to rate their impressions of a man and woman (photographed in the nude) who were described as having a male-dominant, female-dominant, or equalitarian relationship. Results indicated that although subjects' level of sexual arousal was unaffected by dominance, dominant individuals were perceived as more sexually active than the other stimulus persons. As expected, dominance appeared to enhance perceived masculinity, while submissiveness increased perceived femininity. Surprisingly, dominant male and female stimulus persons were not differentially evaluated. These findings were interpreted as being consistent with the assumption dominance is positively associated with sexuality.     

Response discriminative and reinforcement factors in stimulus control of performance on multiple and chained schedules of reinforcement

Discriminative control of the response rates of two groups of rats was equated by training them to cease bar pressing in light-out no-tone ( + ) and to respond during tone and light. Multiple-schedule subjects received food at the same rate for responding during tone or light as for nonresponding in + . For the chained-schedule subjects responding in tone or light only produced + where food was received for nonresponding. In extinction tests multiple-schedule subjects emitted approximately twice the responses to tone-plus-light as to tone or light presented individually (additive summation). The rats trained on the chained schedule, in which the tone and light each controlled substantial response rates but were never paired with food, showed no summation when the tone and light were presented together. The results indicate that discriminative control of response rates and reinforcement differences between schedule components determine stimulus control.     

Polydipsia induced by a schedule of brain stimulation reinforcement

Rats pressed a lever for a signaled brain stimulation reinforcement on either fixed-interval or fixed-ratio schedules. Both schedules induced polydipsia, with a median water intake of 22.5 ml (about four times the control level) in 3-hr sessions. The stimulation did not directly elicit drinking or other behaviors. In a second experiment, two out of four rats became polydipsic during extinction following a continuous schedule of brain stimulation reinforcement. The results were compared with previous attempts to induce polydipsia with a schedule of brain stimulation reinforcement and were discussed in terms of polydipsia as a model of human “compulsive” behaviors.     

Stimulus control and delayed reinforcement

Pigeons were tested for generalization along the line-orientation dimension, after being trained on various two-component multiple schedules. The first component contained either a variable-interval 1-min schedule of immediate reinforcement or an extinction schedule and was associated with a plain white key (S1). The second component contained a variable-interval 1-min schedule of delayed reinforcement and was associated with a black line on a white background (S2). The major results showed that (a) decremental gradients were obtained around the stimulus associated with the delayed reinforcement component when S1 was associated with extinction, but that incremental gradients were obtained when S1 was associated with immediate reinforcement, (b) the subjects' pretraining did not affect the generalization gradients if sufficient training on the terminal multiple schedule was provided, and (c) changing the S1 schedule from immediate reinforcement to extinction produced behavioral contrast if reinforcement was delayed for 10 sec during S2, but not if it was delayed for 20 sec.