After learning a chain-pulling operant, rats were taught a bar-press response which was subsequently brought under SD-SΔ control for some Ss. The manipulanda occupied opposite ends of the apparatus and were never simultaneously present. Discrimination trained Ss continuously exposed to the SΔ for bar pressing during a chain-pull extinction test emitted significantly fewer responses than controls, a result interpreted as trans-response SΔ suppression. A similar decrement in chain pulling was obtained from Ss extinguished under constant exposure to the SD for bar pressing, a result limiting the generality of reports of SD facilitation across response classes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BowerG.KaufmanR.Transfer across drives of the discriminative effect of a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1963, 6, 445–448.
2.
DinsmoorJ. A.A quantitative comparison of the discriminative and reinforcing functions of a stimulus. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1950, 40, 458–472.
3.
EstesW. K.Discriminative conditioning: I. A discriminative property of conditioned anticipation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1943, 32, 150–155.
4.
EstesW. K.Discriminative conditioning: II. Effects of a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus upon a subsequently established operant response. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1948, 38, 173–177.
KellerF. S.SchoenfeldW. N.Principles of psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1950.
7.
MorseW. H.SkinnerB. F.Some factors involved in the stimulus control of operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1958, 1, 103–107.
8.
SidmanM.Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books, 1960.
9.
SiegelS.Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.
10.
TrapoldM. A.CarlsonJ. G.Proximity of manipulandum and foodcup as a determinant of the generalized SD effect. Psychonomic Science, 1965, 2, 327–328.
11.
WalkerK. C.The effect of a discriminative stimulus transferred to a previously unassociated response. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1942, 31, 312–321.
12.
WenrichW. W.CahoonD. D.AmbroseG.LaplaceR.Secondary stimulus control of a “new” operant incompatible with “running to the food magazine.”Psychonomic Science, 1966, 5, 189–190.
13.
WyckoffL. B.SidowskiJ.ChamblissD. J.An experimental study of the relationship between secondary reinforcing and cue effects of a stimulus. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1958, 51, 103–109.
