4 groups of 10 rats were given continuous reinforcement training in a straight runway. All Ss received 100 pellet rewards, but groups differed in number of locomotor responses, goalbox placements, and number of pellets received on each trial. Following acquisition, Ss in each of the main groups were given massed or distributed extinction training. The results showed that Ss required to make a greater number of locomotor responses had faster terminal acquisition speeds and were more resistant to extinction. The results are discussed in terms of the Amsel, Hug, and Surtidge (1968) multiple-pellet reward hypothesis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmselA.HugJ. J.SurridgeC. T.Number of food pellets, goal approaches, and the partial reinforcement effect after minimal acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 77, 530–534.
2.
AndersonN. H.Comparison of different populations: Resistance to extinction and transfer. Psychological Review, 1963, 70, 162–179.
3.
ArmusH. L.Effect of magnitude of reinforcement on acquisition and extinction of a running response. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959, 58, 61–63.
4.
LoganF. A.Incentive. New Haven: Yale Univer. Press, 1960.
5.
McCainG.Partial reinforcement effects following a small number of acquisition trials. Psychonomic Science Monograph Supplements, 1966, 1, 251–270.
6.
McCainG.The partial reinforcement effect after minimal acquisition: Single pellet reward. Psychonomic Science, 1968, 13, 151–152.
7.
PadillaA. M.A few acquisition trials: Effects of magnitude and percent reward. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 9, 241–242.
8.
TrapoldM. A.DorenD. G.Effect of noncontingent partial reinforcement on the resistance to extinction of a runway response. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 71, 429–431.
9.
TrapoldM. A.HoldenD.Noncontingent partial reinforcement of running: A replication. Psychonomic Science, 1966, 5, 449–450.
