Ss receiving partial delay of reward showed better differential learning with a brightness cue given on the delay trials than did Ss receiving partial reinforcement for which the cue was given on nonreward trials. Partial delay of reinforcement resulted in faster start latencies on the trials in which reinforcement was immediate than occurred for continuous immediate reinforcement. The decremental effects of constant delay of reinforcement on performance were eliminated when a sufficient number of trials were given.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmselA.The role of frustrative nonreward in noncontinuous reward situations. Psychological Bulletin, 1958, 55, 102–119.
2.
GoodrichK. P.Performance in different segments of an instrumental response chain as a function of reinforcement schedule. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959, 57, 57–63.
3.
RennerK. E.Influence of deprivation and availability of goal box cues on the temporal gradient of reinforcement. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1963, 56, 101–104.
4.
RennerK. E.Delay of reinforcement: a historical review. Psychological Bulletin, 1964, 61, 341–361.
5.
RennerK. E.Temporal integration: the effect of early experience. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1966, in press.
