Premium
EFFECTS OF VARIABLE‐INTERVAL VALUE AND AMOUNT OF TRAINING ON STIMULUS GENERALIZATION
Author(s) -
Walker Diana J.,
Branch Marc N.
Publication year - 1998
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.1998.70-139
Subject(s) - stimulus generalization , reinforcement , psychology , generalization , stimulus (psychology) , audiology , discrimination learning , statistics , schedule , mathematics , social psychology , developmental psychology , cognitive psychology , computer science , perception , mathematical analysis , medicine , neuroscience , operating system
In Experiment 1 pigeons pecked a key that was illuminated with a 501‐nm light and obtained food by doing so according to a variable‐interval (VI) schedule of reinforcement, the mean value of which differed across groups: either 30 s, 120 s, or 240 s. The pigeons in all three groups were trained for 10 50‐min sessions. Generalization testing was conducted in extinction with different wavelengths of light. Absolute and relative generalization gradients were similar in shape for the three groups. Experiment 2 was a systematic replication of Experiment 1 using line orientation as the stimulus dimension and a mean VI value of either 30 s or 240 s. Again, gradients of generalization were similar for the two groups. In Experiment 3 pigeons pecked a key that was illuminated with a 501‐nm light and obtained food reinforcers according to either a VI 30‐s or a 240‐s schedule. Training continued until response rates stabilized (>30 sessions). For subjects trained with the 30‐s schedule, generalization gradients were virtually identical regardless of whether training was for 10 sessions (Experiment 1) or until response rates stabilized. For subjects trained with the VI 240‐s schedule, absolute generalization gradients for subjects trained to stability were displaced upward relative to gradients for subjects trained for only 10 sessions (Experiment 1), and relative generalization gradients were slightly flatter. These results indicate that the shape of a generalization gradient does not necessarily depend on the rate of reinforcement during 10‐session single‐stimulus training but that the effects of prolonged training on stimulus generalization may be schedule dependent.