DISRUPTION OF RESPONDING MAINTAINED BY CONDITIONED REINFORCEMENT: ALTERATIONS IN RESPONSE-CONDITIONED-REINFORCER RELATIONS

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.”

Download Full-text

What’s in a Click? The Efficacy of Conditioned Reinforcement in Applied Animal Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Animals ◽

10.3390/ani10101757 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (10) ◽

pp. 1757

Author(s):

Nicole Pfaller-Sadovsky ◽

Camilo Hurtado-Parrado ◽

Daniela Cardillo ◽

Lucia G. Medina ◽

Susan G. Friedman

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Conditioned Reinforcement ◽

Behavioral Interventions ◽

Conditioned Reinforcer ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Spoken Word ◽

Multiple Baseline ◽

Systematic Research ◽

Summary Effect ◽

Animal Training

A conditioned reinforcer is a stimulus that acquired its effectiveness to increase and maintain a target behavior on the basis of the individual’s history—e.g., pairings with other reinforcers. This systematic review synthesized findings on conditioned reinforcement in the applied animal training field. Thirty-four studies were included in the review and six studies were eligible for a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of behavioral interventions that implemented conditioned reinforcement (e.g., clicks, spoken word, or whistles paired with food). The majority of studies investigated conditioned reinforcement with dogs (47%, n = 16) and horses (30%, n = 10) implementing click–food pairings. All other species (cats, cattle, fish, goats, and monkeys) were equally distributed across types of conditioned (e.g., clicker or spoken word) and unconditioned reinforcers (e.g., food, water, or tactile). A meta-analysis on the effectiveness of conditioned reinforcement in behavioral interventions found a medium summary effect size (Tau-U 0.77; CI95% = [0.53, 0.89]), when comparing baseline, where no training was done, and treatment levels. Moderators of conditioned reinforcement effectiveness were species (e.g., horses) and research design (e.g., multiple-baseline designs). The small number of intervention-focused studies available limits the present findings and highlights the need for more systematic research into the effectiveness of conditioned reinforcement across species.

Download Full-text

Uncertainty avoidance versus conditioned reinforcement: exploring paradoxical choice in rats

10.1101/2021.08.12.456071 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Victor Ajuwon ◽

Andrés Ojeda ◽

Robin A. Murphy ◽

Tiago Monteiro ◽

Alex Kacelnik

Keyword(s):

Conditioned Reinforcement ◽

Information Seeking ◽

Conditioned Reinforcer ◽

Uncertainty Reduction ◽

Decision Makers ◽

Good News ◽

Positive Outcomes ◽

Auditory Cues ◽

Information Hypothesis ◽

Per Se

Paying a cost to reduce uncertainty can be adaptive, because better informed decision-makers can align their preferences to opportunities. However, birds and mammals display an appetite for information that they cannot use to functionally alter behaviour or its outcomes. We explore two putative motivational mechanisms for this paradoxical behaviour. The information hypothesis proposes that reducing uncertainty is reinforcing per se, consistent with the concept of curiosity: a motivation to know, in the absence of instrumental benefits. In contrast, the conditioned reinforcement hypothesis sees information-seeking as a consequence of asymmetries in secondarily acquired reinforcement: responding increments caused by post-choice stimuli announcing positive outcomes (S+) exceed decrements caused by stimuli signalling absence of reward (S−). We contrast these hypotheses experimentally. Rats chose between two equally profitable options delivering food probabilistically after a fixed delay. In the informative option (Info), the outcome (food/no food) was signalled immediately after choice, whereas in the non-informative option (NoInfo) outcomes were uncertain until the delay lapsed. Subjects preferred (Info) when (1) outcomes were signalled by salient auditory cues, (2) only the absence of reward was signalled, and (3) only reward was signalled, though acquisition was slower when rewards were not explicitly signalled. Our results show that a salient good news signal is not required as a conditioned reinforcer to generate paradoxical preferences. Terminal preferences support the information hypothesis but the slower acquisition of (Info) preference when S+ is not present is consistent with the conditioning account. We conclude that both uncertainty reduction and conditioned reinforcement influence choice.

Download Full-text