Developing and maintaining precurrent behavior that affects the reinforcement probability of another behavior
Date
2018-06-22
Authors
Polson, David Arthur Donald
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
The present study was concerned with the development
and maintenance of (precurrent) behavior that increases the
probability of reinforcement for another (current)
behavior. A single-subject methodology was employed. Nine
human subjects responded on a computer mouse that contained
two buttons. One (current) button was reinforced according
to a probability schedule (p = .02 or a minor deviation
thereof), Depending on the condition, the other button
either had no scheduled consequence (i.e., the precurrent
contingency was absent) or increased the probability of
reinforcement (p = .08) for current responding for 15 s
(i.e., the standard precurrent contingency was present).
Generally, with the precurrent contingency absent,
precurrent responding quickly dropped to near zero levels ;
with the precurrent contingency present, precurrent
responding maintained at enhanced levels. Between- and
within-subject replications suggest that the precurrent
contingency was responsible for the maintenance of
precurrent responding. Initial exposure to the precurrent
contingency resulted in the acquisition of precurrent
responding for four of eight subjects. For the four other
subjects, a special conditioning procedure was enployed.
which included either: (1) increasing the degree to which a
precurrent response raised the probability of reinforcement
for current responding; or (2) decreasing the probability
of reinforcement for current responding to zero unless a
precurrent response had occurred within the previous 15 s.
Both of these procedures produced enhanced levels of
precurrent responding which eventually maintained when the
standard precurrent contingency was reintroduced.
For four subjects, a OOD was later imposed onto the
precurrent contingency. Specifically, a precurrent
response produced a brief timeout followed by the period of
enhanced reinforcement probability for current responding.
In two cases, the CDD reduced precurrent responding to near
zero levels, suggesting that reinforcement for current
responses immediately following a precurrent response can
play an important role in maintenance. In another
experiment, the acquisition of precurrent responding was
observed when the OOD was part of the precurrent
contingency from the beginning, suggesting reinforcement
for current responses immediately following a precurrent
response is not necessary for acquisition.
Current responding generally occurred at a high stable
rate within sessions, between sessions, and between
conditions. Efficiency (defined as the proportion of
current responses in a session emitted under the enhanced
probability state) rarely approached maximal levels and
generally did not Improve with extended exposure to the
precurrent contingency. Post-session verbal reports were
recorded for six subjects. The conditioning and extinction
of precurrent responding was demonstrated in the absence of
"awareness" of the precurrent contingency. The accuracy of
the reports varied both between- and within-subjects, and
like efficiency, did not Improve with extended exposure to
the precurrent contingency.
Some issues considered in the discussion include (1)
the role of frequency of contact with the precurrent
contingency in acquisition and (2) discriminative control
by the reinforcement schedules. Directions for future
research are also discussed.
Description
Keywords
Conditioned response, Reinforcement (Psychology), Behaviorism (Psychology), Operant behavior