RESISTANCE TO CHANGE AS A FUNCTION OF STIMULUS—REINFORCER AND LOCATION—REINFORCER CONTINGENCIES

  • McLean A
  • Campbell‐Tie P
  • Nevin J
16Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Pigeons responded on two keys in each component of a multiple concurrent schedule. In one series of conditions the distribution of reinforcers between keys within one component was varied so as to produce changes in ratios of reinforcer totals for key locations when summed across components. In a second series, reinforcer allocation between components was varied so as to produce changes in ratios of reinforcer totals for components, summed across key locations. In each condition, resistance to change was assessed by presenting response‐independent reinforcers during intercomponent blackouts and (for the first series) by extinction of responding on both keys in both components. Resistance to change for response totals within a component was always greater for the component with the larger total reinforcer rate. However, resistance to change for response totals at a key location was not a positive function of total reinforcement for pecking that key; indeed, relative resistance to extinction for the two locations showed a weak negative relation to ratios of reinforcer totals for key location. These results confirm the determination of resistance to change by stimulus—reinforcer contingencies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McLean, A. P., Campbell‐Tie, P., & Nevin, J. A. (1996). RESISTANCE TO CHANGE AS A FUNCTION OF STIMULUS—REINFORCER AND LOCATION—REINFORCER CONTINGENCIES. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 66(2), 169–191. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1996.66-169

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free