English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The experiment reported here represents a partial replication of an experiment by Newman, Buffington, and Hemmes (in press) and analyzes responding in college students as a function of three different schedules of reinforcement (FR 1, FR 2, FR 3) and either verbal discriminative stimuli (instructions) or nonverbal discriminative stimuli (different colored cards). All consequences (tokens) were based on behavior consistent either with the verbal discriminative stimulus (S(D)) or with the nonverbal S(D). The schedule of reinforcement varied across subjects, and accuracy of the verbal and nonverbal S(D)s varied across phases from. Results showed that the behavior of all continuous reinforcement (FR 1) subjects was sensitive to the accuracy of the verbal S(D)s, but the behavior of subjects in the nonverbal S(D) conditions showed more sensitivity than the behavior of subjects in verbal conditions under intermittent schedules (FR 2 and FR 3). These finding suggest that the behavior of subjects in experiments where instructions are sometimes pitted against actual contingencies of reinforcement is a function not only of the instruction, but also of the type of reinforcement schedule used.

The effects of schedules of reinforcement on instruction-following in human subjects with verbal and nonverbal stimuli