Premium
DISCRIMINATED INTERRESPONSE TIMES: ROLE OF AUTOSHAPED RESPONSES
Author(s) -
Palmer David C.,
Donahoe John W.,
Crowley Michael A.
Publication year - 1985
Publication title -
journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.75
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1938-3711
pISSN - 0022-5002
DOI - 10.1901/jeab.1985.44-301
Subject(s) - pecking order , reinforcement , psychology , contingency , stimulus control , stimulus (psychology) , cognitive psychology , peck (imperial) , social psychology , developmental psychology , neuroscience , mathematics , nicotine , biology , linguistics , philosophy , geometry , evolutionary biology
When discriminated interresponse‐time (IRT) procedures have been used to assess preference relations among temporally extended operants, deviations from matching have been obtained. Using a yoked‐control procedure, the present study found that key pecking in a discriminated IRT procedure has two sources of strength—that arising from the response‐reinforcer contingency that is explicitly arranged, and that arising from a stimulus‐reinforcer contingency that is a by‐product of the explicitly arranged contingency. The key pecking of all lead birds, and that of 3 of the 4 birds exposed to a yoked autoshaping procedure, was controlled by the keylight that signaled the lead birds' criterion IRTs. Because stimulus control of key pecking by the keylight, whether autoshaped or discriminative, fosters deviations from matching, the discriminated IRT procedure does not provide an appropriate basis for conclusions about preference relations among IRTs.