Indexador

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

Resumo não informado pela fonte indexada.

The vocal behavior of three Cebus monkeys was maintained by fixed‐ratio schedules of response dependent reinforcement at values between fixed‐ratio 1 and fixed‐ratio 15. In one monkey that was exposed to variable‐interval, fixed‐interval, and conjunctive fixed‐ratio fixed‐interval schedules of reinforcement, vocal responding occurred at a low rate, but schedule‐appropriate patterns were maintained. The rates and patterns of responding engendered indicated that the vocal operant can be brought under schedule control in the monkey by the use of response‐dependent reinforcement.

The behavioral effects of various schedules of electric shock presentation were investigated during and after the imprinting of Peking ducklings to moving stimuli. The behavior of following a moving imprinted stimulus was differentially controlled by a multiple schedule of punishment and avoidance that respectively suppressed and maintained following behavior. Pole‐pecking, reinforced by presentations of the imprinted stimulus, was suppressed by response‐produced shock (punishment); various schedules of response‐independent shock and delayed punishment had an overall minimal effect. The delivery of response‐independent shock in the presence of one of two stimuli, both during and after imprinting, resulted in a marked reduction in choice of the stimulus paired with shock. The experiments provide no support for a differentiation of imprinting from learning on the basis of the behavioral effects of aversive stimuli. Instead, as is the case with other organisms, the schedule under which shock is delivered to imprinted ducklings appears to be an important determinant of the temporal patterning of subsequent behavior.

Pigeons trained to peck one of two keys for food were exposed to an ascending and descending series of fixed‐interval values. A response on the second key produced an escape period consisting of a visual stimulus change. During escape periods, the fixed‐interval timer continued to operate and even if it timed out, a response on the food key would not operate the feeder unless preceded by an escape‐key response that terminated the escape condition. As the fixed‐interval schedule was increased logarithmically through six values from 30 to 960 sec, the percentage of session time spent in escape as well as the frequency, duration, and rate of escape increased to a maximum and then decreased. One subject did not develop escape behavior to any significant degree. For all pigeons, escapes usually occurred after, rather than before, reinforcement.

Schedule‐induced polydipsia was studied in rats bar pressing under two‐component multiple schedules of food reinforcement. The first component of the multiple schedule was a variable‐interval 1‐min schedule throughout the experiment. The schedule comprising the second component was varied over blocks of sessions in terms of rate and magnitude of reinforcement, and was either variable‐interval 3‐min (one pellet), variable‐interval 3‐min (three pellets), variable‐interval 1‐min (one pellet), or extinction. Water intake per session varied with the rate of reinforcement in the schedule comprising the second component and was highest when the schedule was variable‐interval 1‐min. Both bar‐pressing behavior and licking behavior showed behavioral interactions between the two components of the multiple schedules. With magnitude of reinforcement held constant, a matching relationship was observed between lick rate and reinforcement rate; the relative frequency of licks in the constant component matched the relative frequency of reinforcement in that component. Bar pressing, however, showed only a moderate degree of relativity matching. During the schedule‐induced licking, a burst of licking followed each delivery of a pellet (post‐prandial drinking). The duration of these bursts of licking was observed to be a function of the inter‐reinforcement interval.

Pigeons worked on second‐order schedules in which completion of fixed‐interval component schedules was reinforced with food according to a variable‐interval schedule of reinforcement. The completion of each fixed‐interval component resulted in the presentation of a brief electric shock. In one condition (shock‐paired), the completion of every fixed‐interval component, including those that ended in food, resulted in the shock. In another condition (shock‐nonpaired), completion resulted in shock except for those components that ended in food. Shock presentations resulted in a positively accelerated rate within fixed‐interval components. This patterning within components was similar whether the shock was intermittently paired with food or not. Response rates tended to decrease as shock intensity increased. The characteristic fixed‐interval response pattern within components did not occur when shock presentations were omitted at the end of each component (tandem schedule). When shocks were scheduled but food was no longer presented (extinction) response rates declined to a near‐zero level. The performance under shock conditions is similar to that in other studies in which visual and auditory stimuli are presented at the completion of component schedules.

Pigeons performed on a second‐order schedule in which fixed‐interval components were maintained under a variable‐interval schedule. Completion of each fixed‐interval component resulted in a brief‐stimulus presentation and/or food. The relation of the brief stimulus and food was varied across conditions. Under some conditions, the brief stimulus was never paired with food. Under other conditions, the brief stimulus was paired with food; three different pairing procedures were used: (a) a response produced the simultaneous onset of the stimulus and food; (b) a response produced the stimulus before food with the stimulus remaining on during food presentation; (c) a response produced the stimulus and the offset of the stimulus was simultaneous with the onset of the food cycle. The various pairing and nonpairing operations all produced similar effects on performance. Under all conditions, response rates were positively accelerated within fixed‐interval components. Total response rates and Index of Curvature measures were similar across conditions. In one condition, a blackout was paired with food; with this different stimulus in effect, less curvature resulted. The results suggest that pairing of a stimulus is not a necessary condition for within‐component patterning under some second‐order schedules.

This study compared self‐regulation and external regulation procedures in the treatment of children's disruptive classroom behavior. After baseline data were collected, three of the four most disruptive children in each of 10 first‐ and second‐grade classrooms received reinforcement for achieving low rates of disruptive behavior. The fourth child served as a control subject throughout the experiment. Two of the three experimental subjects were then taught to self‐observe their own disruptive behavior. In the final reinforcement period, these subjects were given control over dispensing reinforcers to themselves, based on their self‐collected behavioral data while subjects in the other experimental group continued with the externally managed reinforcement In extinction, reinforcement was discontinued for all subjects, but one of the self‐regulation subjects in each classroom continued overtly to self‐observe. Results indicated that both reinforcement programs reduced disruptive behavior. The self‐regulation procedures were slightly more effective in reducing disruptiveness than was the external regulation procedure, and this advantage persisted into extinction. These results suggest that self‐regulation procedures provide a practical, inexpensive, and powerful alternative in dealing with disruptive behavior in children.