Skip to main content
Log in

Stimulus Control After Training with Fixed Interval and Variable Interval Schedules of Reinforcement

  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rats received discrimination training where light-on was the S+ condition and light-off the S- condition. 2 Ss were trained with a fixed interval (FI) 30-sec. schedule with a limited hold of 5 sec. during S+, while 3 Ss were trained with a variable interval (VI) 30-sec. schedule during S+. Probe testing produced steeper generalization gradients for the FI trained Ss than for the VI trained Ss. Exp. 2 was conducted with 2 more VI Ss trained and tested in an identical manner to the FI Ss of Exp. 1. Gradients for the FI Ss of Exp. 1 were steeper than for those of the VI Ss of Exp. 2. Thus less stimulus control was exerted after training with VI than with FI schedules. The discriminative properties of reinforcement during the VI schedule competed with and thereby weakened S+ stimulus control. An alternate explanation in terms of changes in response patterns was discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • BRETHOWER, D. M., & REYNOLDS, G. S. 1962. A facilitative effect of punishment on unpunished behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 5, 191–192.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • CATANIA, C. A., & REYNOLDS, G. S. 1968. A quantitative analysis of responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 11, 327–383.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • CRUSE, D. B., VITULLI, W., & DERTKE, M. 1966. Discriminative and reinforcing properties of two types of food pellets. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 293–303.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • HEARST, E., KORESKO, M. B., & POPPEN, R. 1964. Stimulus generalization and the response-reinforcement contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 7, 369–380.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • NEVIN, J. A., & SHETTLESWORTH, S. J. 1966. An analysis of contrast effects in multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 305–315.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SEWELL, W. R., & KENDALL, S. B. 1965. A note on interresponse time distributions during generalization testing. Psychonomic Science, 3, 95–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SEWELL, W. R., NEWSOM, T. J. MCCOY, J. F., ATFIELD, T. STANTON, J. P., & GARNER, B. 1971. Steady state generalization following testing with different inter-probe test intervals. Journal of Perceptual Motor Skills, 33, 1283–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • THOMAS, D. R., & SWITALSKI, R. W. 1966. A comparison of stimulus generalization following variable ratio and variable interval training. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 236–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ZEILER, M. D. 1969. Repeated measurements of reinforcement schedule effects on gradients of stimulus control. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 451–461.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Newsom, T.J., McCoy, J.F., Garner, B.O. et al. Stimulus Control After Training with Fixed Interval and Variable Interval Schedules of Reinforcement. Psychol Rec 22, 413–421 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394108

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394108

Navigation