|
|
Byrne, T., Sutphin, G., & Poling, A. (1998). Acquisition, extinction, and reacquisition of responding with delayed and immediate reinforcement. Behav. Process., 43(1), 97–101.
Abstract: The present study investigated acquisition, extinction, and reacquisition of free-operant responding when rats' lever presses produced water after a resetting delay of 0, 10, 20, or 30 s. Results indicated that: (1) responding was acquired rapidly at all delays without shaping or autoshaping; (2) resistance to extinction was directly related to delay length and inversely related to intermittency of reinforcement; (3) responding acquired with delayed reinforcement recovered less rapidly from extinction, and was less efficient, than responding acquired with immediate reinforcement. Comparing these results with those of studies using discrete-trials and free-operant procedures with no reinforcement delay suggest that the specific conditions under which behavior is maintained determines, in part, the behavioral effects of delay and intermittency of reinforcement.
|
|
|
|
Snycerski, S., Laraway, S., & Poling, A. (2005). Response acquisition with immediate and delayed conditioned reinforcement. Behav. Process., 68(1), 1–11.
Abstract: Groups comprising eight rats initially were exposed to response-independent water deliveries, then to conditions under which a lever-press response raised an empty dipper immediately or after a resetting delay of 15, 30, or 45 s. When their performance was compared to that of control animals using a 90% confidence level, six rats in the immediate-reinforcement group met the primary criterion for response acquisition during a single 6-h session; 4, 4, and 3 did so in the 15, 30, and 45 s delay groups, respectively. Similar evidence of acquisition was obtained when a 95% confidence level was used. With a 99% confidence level, however, evidence of acquisition was not compelling. Although these data appear to provide the first demonstration of response acquisition in the absence of handshaping or autoshaping under conditions where the putative reinforcer is both conditioned and delayed, they also demonstrate that whether response acquisition occurs depends, in part, on how it is defined.
|
|
