In a foru-phase experiment, phase I was runway training under four different reinforcement conditions: partial reinforcement (PRF), partial delayed reinforcement (PDR), constant delayed reinforcement (CDR), and consistent reinforcement (CRF). During phase 2 extinction, PRF and PDR groups did not differ; both groups were more persistent than group CDR, which was in turn superior to the CRF control. Phase 3 was CRF reacquisition for all groups. During phase 4 extinction, PRF group was more presistent than the other three groups which did not differ. A Pavlovian counter-conditioning hypothesis was proposed to account for the absence of durable persistence following PDR training.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmselA. (1958). The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situations. Psychological Bulletin55, 102–19.
2.
AmselA. (1962). Frustrative nonreward in partial reinforcement and discrimination learning: some recent history and a theoretical extension. Psychological Review69, 306–28.
3.
AmselA. (1967). Partial reinforcement effects on vigor and persistence. The Psychology of Learning and MotivationSpenceK. W.SpenceJ. T.New York: Academic Press.
4.
AmselA.WongP. T. P.TraupmannK. L. (1971). Short-term and long-term factors in extinction and durable persistence. Journal of Experimental Psychology90, 90–5.
5.
BittermanM. E.FeddersenW. E.TylerD. W. (1953). Secondary reinforcement and the discrimination hypothesis. American Journal of Psychology66, 456–64.
6.
CampbellP. E. (1970). Partially delayed reward. Journal of Comparatvie and Physiological Psychology1, 152–9.
7.
CapaldiE. J. (1967). A sequential hypothesis of instrumental learning. The Psychology of Learning and MotivationSpenceK. W.SpenceJ. T.New York: Academic Press Vol. I.
8.
CrespiL. P. (1942). Quantitative variation of incentive and performance in the white rat. American Journal of Psychology55, 467–517.
9.
DavenportJ. W. (1962). The interaction of magnitude and delay of reinforcement in spatial discrimination. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology55, 267–73.
10.
DoninJ.SurridgeC. T.AmselA. (1967). Extinction following partial delay of reward with immediate continuous reward interpolated, at 24-hour intertrial intervals. Journal of Experimental Psychology74, 50–3.
11.
GonzalezR. C.BittermanM. E. (1969). Spaced-trials partial reinforcement effect as a function of contrast. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology67, 94–103.
12.
HulseS. H.Jr (1958). Amount and percentage of reinforcement and duration of goal confinement in conditioning and extinction. Journal of Experimental Psychology56, 48–57.
13.
LoganF. A. (1960). IncentiveNew Haven: Yale University Press.
14.
LoganF. A. (1965). Decision making by rats: delay versus amount of reward. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology59, 1–12.
15.
LoganF. A.WagnerA. R. (1965). Reward and PunishmentBoston: Allyn and Bacon.
16.
PavlovI. P.AnrepG. V. (1927). Conditioned ReflexesLondon and New York: Oxford University Press.
17.
RashotteM. E.SurridgeT. (1969). Partial reinforcement and partial delay of reinforcement effects with 72-hour intertrial intervals and interpolated continuous rei forcement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology21, 156–61.
18.
RennerK. E. (1964). Delay of reinforcement: a historical review. Psychological Bulletin61, 341–61.
19.
RennerK. E. (1968). Temporal integration: amount of reward and relative utility of immediate and delayed outcomes. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology65, 182–6.
20.
SgroJ. A.DyalJ. A.AnastasioE. J. (1967). Effects of constant delay of reinforcement on acquisition asymptote and resistance to extinction. Journal of Experimental Psychology73, 634–7.
21.
SpenceK. W. (1956). Behavior Theory and ConditioningNew Haven: Yale University Press.
22.
SurridgeC. T.MockK.AmselA. (1968). Effect of interpolated extinction after partial delay of reward training on subsequent reacquisition and extinction. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology20, 321–8.
23.
SutherlandN. S.MackintoshN. J. (1971). Mechanisms of Animal Discrimination LearningNew York: Academic Press.
24.
TraupmannK. L.AmselA.WongP. T. P. (1973). Persistence early and late in extinction as a function of number of continuous reinforcements preceding partial reinforcement training. Animal Learning and Behavior1, 219–22.
25.
TraupmannK. L.WongP. T. P.AmselA. (1971). Durability of persistence as a function of number of partially reinforced trials. Journal of Experimental Psychology88, 372–5.
26.
WagnerA. (1961). Effects of amount and percentage of reinforcement and number of acquisition trials on conditioning and extinction. Journal of Experimental Psychology62, 234–42.
27.
WongP. T. P.LeeC. T.NovierF. H. (1971). The partial reinforcement effect (PRE) sustained through extinction and continuous reinforcement in two strains of inbred mice. Psychonomic Science22, 141–3.
28.
ZeamanD. (1949). Response latency as a function of the amount of reinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology39, 466–83.
