The term "schedule-induced" implies that the overall frequency of a behavior is greater in the presence of an intermittent schedule of reinforcement than in the absence of such a schedule. Consequently, the occurrence of interreinforcement behavior is not in itself sufficient evidence of schedule induction: a test of induction requires comparison between an intermittent-schedule condition and a nonschedule baseline. The relative merits of different types of nonschedule baseline are examined, and it is concluded that the best test of schedule-induction involves both an extinction and a massed-reinforcer baseline. A working definition of schedule-induction is suggested on this basis. Studies purporting to show schedule induction of activities other than drinking are critically reviewed, and it is concluded that schedule induction may be less general than is usually supposed. It may therefore be more fruitful to seek an explanation of schedule-induced drinking which focuses specifically on the interaction between food and water ingestion in the rat, rather than an explanation involving concepts such as stress, frustration, or arousal. © 1981 Psychonomic Society, Inc.
CITATION STYLE
Roper, T. J. (1981). What is meant by the term “schedule-induced,” and how general is schedule induction? Animal Learning & Behavior, 9(4), 433–440. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209773
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.