By responding on a changeover key, subjects could change the prevailing unsignalled VI 65-sec. schedule to a signalled, but otherwise identical, schedule. On the signalled schedule a brief tone preceded reinforcement. Regardless of the duration of the signal (5.0, 3.0, 1.0, 0.5, or 0.1 sec.), subjects strongly preferred the signalled schedule. Withdrawal of the signal produced a rapid decline in the changeover key response rate, demonstrating that production of the signalled condition maintained the responding. Results support the information hypothesis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CantorM. B.LolordoV. M.Rats prefer signalled reinforcing brain stimulation to unsignalled ESB. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1970, 71, 182–191.
2.
HendryD. P.Reinforcing value of information: Fixed ratio schedules. In HendryD. P. (Ed.), Conditioned reinforcement. Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey, 1969. Pp. 300–342.
3.
HerrnsteinR. J.Secondary reinforcement and rate of primary reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1964, 7, 27–36.
4.
LewisP.LewinL.MuehleisenP.StoyakM.Preference for signalled reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, in press.
5.
LutzR. F.PerkinsC. C.Jr.A time variable in the acquisition of observing responses. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1960, 53, 180–182.
6.
MitchellK. M.PerkinsN. P.PerkinsC. C.Jr.Conditions affecting acquisition of observing responses in the absence of differential reward. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1965, 60, 435–437.
ProkasyW. F.Jr.The acquisition of observing responses in the absence of differential external reinforcement. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1956, 49, 131–134.
