The order of continuous,partial and nonreward trials and resistance to extinction

In the first experiment rats were given either 16 or 48 nonrewarded or continuously rewarded trials prior to 24 continuously or partially rewarded trials, followed by extinction. Increased resistance to extinction was found for increasing numbers of nonrewarded trials when they were followed by partial reward, but not when followed by continuous reward. Similarly, more continuously rewarded trials followed by partial reward tended to increase resistance to extinction. Because of the theoretical importance of the effect of continuous reward followed by partial, a second experiment was performed where the range of the number of continuously rewarded trials was extended to 0, 48, and 96. Contrary to many theoretical predictions, resistance to extinction increased as a function of increasing amounts of continuous reward.     

The distracting effect of material reward: An alternative explanation for the superior performance of reward groups in probability learning

To determine whether the distraction effect associated with material rewards in discrimination learning can account for the superior performance of reward groups in probability learning, the performance of 144 school children (preschool, second, and fifth grades) on a two-choice successive discrimination task was compared under three reinforcement conditions (material reward, marker, and knowledge of results). The two events in the task had different frequencies of occurrence, as in probability learning, yet they appeared in a constant order to make 100% payoff possible. The subjects in the reward and marker groups learned the task more slowly, and the nonlearners among them used stereotyped alternation patterns to a greater degree than subjects in the knowledge-of-results condition. These findings suggest that a distracting effect of material reward is present in probability learning and may explain the superior performance of reward groups typically found in probability learning studies.     

Resistance to continuous delay of reinforcement or extinction following partial delay or partial reinforcement in acquisition: A direct comparison

Rats received either partial reward (PR) or partial delay (PD) in acquisition with one, two, or three delay or nonreward trials followed by an immediately rewarded trial or one delay or nonreward trial followed by an immediately rewarded trial. These four groups were then split in half and given either continuous delay or continuous nonreward (extinction) in a “response persistence” phase. In addition, two continuously reinforced groups, one experiencing continuous delay, and the other experiencing extinction were included. The results showed that response persistence was greater when PD groups were given continuous delay rather than extinction, but the opposite was true for PR groups. The “length” (1, 2, or 3 versus 1 nonreward or delay trial) also transferred to the response persistence phase with the length 1, 2, and 3 conditions being more persistent than the 1 length conditions. The results were discussed with respect to theoretical notions of response persistence.     

Magnitude of negative reinforcement and resistance to extinction

In the first experiment rats experienced large or small magnitude of negative reinforcement (shock reduction) in a straight alley. Half of the subjects in each magnitude group received continuous reinforcement, and the other half received a 50% partial reinforcement schedule (nonreinforcement consisting of no shock reduction in the goal box). In extinction the groups were ordered: large partial > small-partial > small-continuous > large-continuous. In the second experiment rats received large, small and nonreinforcement in various sequences using the runway-negative reinforcement procedure and were ordered: SNL>LNL>SNL>LNS in resistance to extinction (letters represent the magnitudes in the sequence experienced in acquisition). The results of these experiments indicate a commality between positive and negative reinforcement with respect to behavioral phenomena and theoretical accounts of those phenomena.     

Patterning,partial reinforcement,and N-length effects at spaced trials as a function of reinstatement of retrieval cues

Four experiments are reported which demonstrate the importance of the reinstatement of retrieval cues in partial-reinforcement experiments using spaced trials. Reinstatement occurs when the goalbox and startbox are of the same brightness (gray). Nonreinstatement occurs when the goalbox and startbox are of different brightnesses (black-and-white striped vs gray). Under reinstatement conditions, both a partial-reinforcement effect (PRE) and N-length effects were observed whether small reward or large reward was used. Under nonreinstatement conditions, a PRE was observed when large reward was used but not when small reward was used; N-length effects were not observed either with large or small reward. Finally, using a 24-hr intertrial interval, single alternation patterning was found only with a group receiving large reward, a long nonreward confinement duration, and reinstatement. These results are not consistent with the notion that massed and spaced trials are governed by separate mechanisms, and support an explanation of both massed and spaced trials based on E. J. Capaldi's sequential theory.