DELAY OF REINFORCEMENT AND THE RETENTION OF UNFAMILIAR, MEANINGLESS MATERIAL

1962 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 553 ◽  
Author(s):  
YVONNE BRACKBILL
2000 ◽  
Vol 87 (3) ◽  
pp. 988-990 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Calef ◽  
Michael C. Choban ◽  
Katherine R. Glenney ◽  
Ruth A. Calef ◽  
Julie N. Godbey ◽  
...  

The present experiment investigated whether narrow goal-box confinement in studies of delay of reinforcement in the runway may have had aversive or punishing effects. Analysis showed no difference in performance between groups of rats who were either confined in a narrow goal-box or a large compartment while receiving their delay of reinforcement. The results suggest that narrow goal-box confinement does not have aversive characteristics.


1973 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 307-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward W. C. McAllister

The present experiment tested the effects of reinforcement type (stimulus term, response term, and stimulus-response pairs) and type of recall-retention test (stimulus type or response type) as between- S variables and delay-of-reinforcement interval as a within- S variable on retention in paired-associate learning. The analysis showed that type of reinforcement and delay-of-reinforcement interval resulted in significant effects. Type of recall-retention test was not significant and interactions were nonsignificant.


1965 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 576-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Frank Weiss ◽  
William Buchanan ◽  
Benjamin Pasamanick

1977 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Frank Weiss ◽  
Michele K. Steigleder ◽  
Robert E. Cramer ◽  
Richard A. Feinberg

1973 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-70
Author(s):  
Frank C. Leeming ◽  
Joel E. Robinson

Rats in a shuttle box were reinforced by shock termination after delays of 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, or 16 sec. All Ss received 100 training trials and Ss in Groups 0, 1, and 4 received an additional 30 test trials on which shock termination was delayed for 20 sec. During training and testing, escape latency, and Ss' location in the compartment at the moment of shock termination were recorded. Number of trials required to reach criterion was directly related to length of delay. The differences between asymptotic response levels were small and, with the exception of Group 16, nonsignificant. Ss in Groups 2, 4, and 8 showed a significant increase in location consistency during training. During resting Groups 0 and 1 showed marked decrements in performance while Group 4 showed no increase in escape latency. Group 4 also showed significantly higher location consistency than Groups 0 and 1. These findings were discussed in relation to Spence's theories of delay of reinforcement and extinction.


1966 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 121-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Garcia ◽  
Frank R. Ervin ◽  
Robert A. Koelling

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document