Abstract
Pigeons’ rates of responding on simple schedules appearing alone or as components of signalkey multiple schedules were not systematically different early in training, but were different later in training. This suggests that a simple schedule may be an appropriate baseline from which to measure behavioral contrast. Positive behavioral contrast, like the present differences between simple and multiple schedule responding, does not appear when naive subjects respond on signalkey multiple schedules, but does appear when experimentally experienced subjects are used.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Catania, A. C., & Reynolds, G. S. (1968). A quantitative analysis of the responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 11, 327–383.
Freeman, B. J. (1971). The role of response-independent reinforcement in producing behavioral contrast effects in the rat. Learning & Motivation, 2, 138–147.
Halliday, M. S., & Boakes, R. A. (1974). Behavioral contrast without response-rate reduction. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 453–462.
Hearst, E., & Gormley, D. (1976). Some tests of the additivity (autoshaping) theory of behavioral contrast. Animal Learning & Behavior, 4, 145–150.
Jaffe, M. L. (1973). The effects of lesions in the ventromedial nucleus of the hypothalamus on behavioral contrast in rats. Physiological Psychology, 1, 191–198.
Keller, K. (1974). The role of elicited responding in behavioral contrast. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 249–257.
McSweeney, F. K. (1980). Differences between rates of responding emitted during simple and multiple schedules. Animal Learning & Behavior, 8, 392–400.
McSweeney, F. K. (1982). Responding during simple schedules and during less favorable components of multiple schedules. Behaviour Analysis Letters, 2, 345–351.
Pear, J. J., & Wilke, D. M. (1971). Contrast and induction in rats on multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 15, 289–296.
Schwartz, B. (1975). Discriminative stimulus location as a determinant of negative behavioral contrast in the pigeon. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 23, 167–176.
Schwartz, B. (1978). Stimulus-reinforcer contingencies and local behavioral contrast. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 297–308.
Schwartz, B., Hamilton, B., & Silberberg, A. (1975). Behavioral contrast in the pigeon: A study of the duration of key pecking maintained on multiple schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 24, 199–206.
Spealman, R. D. (1976). Interactions in multiple schedules: The role of the stimulus-reinforcer contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 26, 79–93.
White, K. G., & Braunstein, S. B. (1979). Stimulus control of topographically tagged responding. Animal Learning & Behavior, 7, 333–338.
Williams, B. A., & Heyneman, N. (1981). Determinants of contrast in the signal-key procedure: Evidence against additivity theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 35, 161–173.
Woodruff, G. (1979). Behavioral contrast and type of reward: Role of elicited response topography. Animal Learning & Behavior, 7, 339–346.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Some of these data were presented at the 1983 meeting of The Psychonomic Society.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McSweeney, F.K., Dougan, J.D. & Farmer, V.A. Simple schedule and signal-key multiple schedule responding and behavioral contrast. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 24, 88–90 (1986). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330512
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330512