Establishing praise as a conditioned reinforcer: Pairing with one versus multiple reinforcers

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 534-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura L. Dudley ◽  
Judah B. Axe ◽  
Ronald F. Allen ◽  
Emily J. Sweeney‐Kerwin
Keyword(s):  
Conditioned Reinforcer ◽  
Multiple Reinforcers

Stimulus generalization of a positive conditioned reinforcer: II. Effects of discrimination training.

1964 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 402-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Thomas ◽  
Salvatore C. Caronite
Keyword(s):  
Discrimination Training ◽  
Conditioned Reinforcer ◽  
Stimulus Generalization

Suboptimal choice in pigeons: Does the predictive value of the conditioned reinforcer alone determine choice?

2018 ◽  
Vol 157 ◽  
pp. 320-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob P. Case ◽  
Thomas R. Zentall
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Value ◽  
Conditioned Reinforcer ◽  
Suboptimal Choice

Response : Stimulus Generalization of a Positive Conditioned Reinforcer

Science ◽  
1963 ◽  
Vol 142 (3588) ◽  
pp. 9-9
Author(s):  
David R. Thomas ◽  
Jon L. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Conditioned Reinforcer ◽  
Stimulus Generalization ◽  
Response Stimulus

Suboptimal Choice by Pigeons: Evidence that the Value of the Conditioned Reinforcer Rather than its Frequency Determines Choice

2015 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Zentall ◽  
Jennifer R. Laude ◽  
Jessica P. Stagner ◽  
Aaron P. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Conditioned Reinforcer ◽  
Suboptimal Choice

scholarly journals Excitatory second-order conditioning using a backward first-order conditioned stimulus: A challenge for prediction error reduction

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (6) ◽  
pp. 1453-1465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Prével ◽  
Vinca Rivière ◽  
Jean-Claude Darcheville ◽  
Gonzalo P Urcelay ◽  
Ralph R Miller
Keyword(s):  
Conditioned Stimulus ◽  
Conditioned Reinforcement ◽  
Prediction Error ◽  
Conditioned Reinforcer ◽  
Error Reduction ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Temporal Coding ◽  
First Order ◽  
Order Conditioning ◽  
Opponent Processes

Prével and colleagues reported excitatory learning with a backward conditioned stimulus (CS) in a conditioned reinforcement preparation. Their results add to existing evidence of backward CSs sometimes being excitatory and were viewed as challenging the view that learning is driven by prediction error reduction, which assumes that only predictive (i.e., forward) relationships are learned. The results instead were consistent with the assumptions of both Miller’s Temporal Coding Hypothesis and Wagner’s Sometimes Opponent Processes (SOP) model. The present experiment extended the conditioned reinforcement preparation developed by Prével et al. to a backward second-order conditioning preparation, with the aim of discriminating between these two accounts. We tested whether a second-order CS can serve as an effective conditioned reinforcer, even when the first-order CS with which it was paired is a backward CS that elicits no responding. Evidence of conditioned reinforcement was found, despite no conditioned response (CR) being elicited by the first-order backward CS. The evidence of second-order conditioning in the absence of excitatory conditioning to the first-order CS is interpreted as a challenge to SOP. In contrast, the present results are consistent with the Temporal Coding Hypothesis and constitute a conceptual replication in humans of previous reports of excitatory second-order conditioning in rodents with a backward CS. The proposal is made that learning is driven by “discrepancy” with prior experience as opposed to “ prediction error.”

scholarly journals Functional Communication Training for Multiple Reinforcers: an Evaluation of Isolated Control Following a Synthesized Context

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 592-599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan A. Boyle ◽  
Shannie M. Stamper ◽  
Elizabeth A. Donaldson ◽  
Kaitlin S. Curtis ◽  
Kara L. Forck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Functional Communication Training ◽  
Communication Training ◽  
Functional Communication ◽  
Multiple Reinforcers
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document