16 female, albino rats served as Ss in an investigation of performance on single and double-alternation sequences of reward-nonreward. Ss were run in an operant conditioning chamber with a 24-hr. intenrial interval. The results indicated that Ss receiving the single-alternation reward-nonreward sequence learned to respond appropriately, i.e., fast on reward days, slow on nonreward days, while Ss run under the double-alternation sequence did not exhibit appropriate responding. The results are seen as being supportive of Capaldi's sequential hypothesis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CapaldiE. J.Partial reinforcement: A hypothesis of sequential effects. Psychological Review, 1966, 73, 459–477.
2.
CapaldiE. J.A sequential hypothesis of instrumental learning. In SpenceK. W.SpenceJ. T. (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory. Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 1967. Pp. 67–156.
3.
CapaldiE. J.An analysis of the role of reward and reward magnitude in instrumental learning. In ReynierseJ. H. (Ed.), Current issues in animal learning: A colloquium. Lincoln: Univer. of Nebraska Press, 1970. Pp. 357–389.
4.
CapaldiE. J.Memory and learning: A sequential viewpoint. In HenigW. K.JamesP. H. R. (Eds.), Animal memory. New York: Academic Press, 1971. Pp. 111–154.
5.
CapaldiE. J.SpiveyJ. E.Stimulus consequences of reinforcement and nonreinforcement: Stimulus traces or memory. Psychonomic Science, 1964, 1, 181–182.
6.
CapaldiE. J.StanleyL. R.Temporal properties of reinforcement aftereffects. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1963, 65, 169–175.
7.
HullC. L.A behavior system. New Haven: Yale Univer. Press, 1952.
8.
SheffieldV. F.Extinction as a function of partial reinforcement and distribution of practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1949, 39, 511–526.
9.
SurridgeC. T.AmselA.A “patterning” effect that seems unrelated to after-effects from reward and nonreward. Psychonomic Science, 1965, 3, 373–374.
