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

Separation of the contingent and noncontingent effects of a schedule on amount of instrumental responding is desirable but difficult in schedules that involve instrumental and contingent responses that are either highly probable or very similar. Three studies in which rats were required to lick a solution of .1% saccharin for access to a preferred solution of .4% saccharin showed that neither single nor paired operant baselines of the instrumental response allowed accurate separation of the contingent and noncontingent effects of a fixed-ratio schedule. Two within-subject yoking procedures provided the best baselines of noncontingent effects: the massed baseline measured amount of .1% licking when each subject received free access to the total amount of .4% licking it obtained at asymptote under the schedule; the matched baseline measured .1% licking when each subject received the same access to the .4% solution, but presented in the intermittent pattern obtained during the schedule. Of the three algebraic models used to predict noncontingent effects, the substitution model was most promising, but still not adequate. The procedure of a between-subjects yoked control was also not effective.

Licking one saccharin solution for access to another in rats: Contingent and noncontingent effects in instrumental performance