From Contrast to Reinforcement: Role of Response Contingency in Anticipatory Contrast

Charles F. Flaherty, Patricia S. Grigson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

58 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Intake of a 0.15% saccharin solution is suppressed if access to the saccharin is followed by access to 32% sucrose in brief daily pairings. The present series of four experiments was concerned with factors that lead to this anticipatory contrast effect (suppressed saccharin intake) rather than a reinforcement effect. In Experiment 1, anticipatory contrast was obtained with an autoshaping procedure (no lick requirement on the initial tube), and degree of contrast did not vary as a function of intersolution interval in the range of 0-15 s. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that requirements of 10, 100, 200, or 400 licks on the first tube available led to a reinforcement effect in latency, but a requirement of 0 licks (autoshaping procedure) led to a contrast effect in licks and latency. In Experiment 4, a group with a 200-contingent-lick requirement showed a reinforcement effect in latency, but a group yoked to this contingent group showed a contrast effect in both latency and licks. Overall, the results suggest that anticipatory contrast occurs under conditions of a "relaxed" instrumental contingency. The data are discussed in terms of control of behavior by stimulus-stimulus, response-stimulus, and stimulus-response associations, and the results are related to behavioral contrast, to flavor-outcome associations, and to "misbehavior" produced by Pavlovian-instrumental interactions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)165-176
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes
Volume14
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1988

Fingerprint

saccharin
Saccharin
reinforcement
behavior problems
Behavior Control
Sucrose
flavor
experiment
sucrose
Reinforcement (Psychology)
effect

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Cite this

@article{d03436a720e94ff092dea5bb7ae78e3c,
title = "From Contrast to Reinforcement: Role of Response Contingency in Anticipatory Contrast",
abstract = "Intake of a 0.15{\%} saccharin solution is suppressed if access to the saccharin is followed by access to 32{\%} sucrose in brief daily pairings. The present series of four experiments was concerned with factors that lead to this anticipatory contrast effect (suppressed saccharin intake) rather than a reinforcement effect. In Experiment 1, anticipatory contrast was obtained with an autoshaping procedure (no lick requirement on the initial tube), and degree of contrast did not vary as a function of intersolution interval in the range of 0-15 s. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that requirements of 10, 100, 200, or 400 licks on the first tube available led to a reinforcement effect in latency, but a requirement of 0 licks (autoshaping procedure) led to a contrast effect in licks and latency. In Experiment 4, a group with a 200-contingent-lick requirement showed a reinforcement effect in latency, but a group yoked to this contingent group showed a contrast effect in both latency and licks. Overall, the results suggest that anticipatory contrast occurs under conditions of a {"}relaxed{"} instrumental contingency. The data are discussed in terms of control of behavior by stimulus-stimulus, response-stimulus, and stimulus-response associations, and the results are related to behavioral contrast, to flavor-outcome associations, and to {"}misbehavior{"} produced by Pavlovian-instrumental interactions.",
author = "Flaherty, {Charles F.} and Grigson, {Patricia S.}",
year = "1988",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1037/0097-7403.14.2.165",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "165--176",
journal = "Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes",
issn = "0097-7403",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "2",

}

From Contrast to Reinforcement : Role of Response Contingency in Anticipatory Contrast. / Flaherty, Charles F.; Grigson, Patricia S.

In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, Vol. 14, No. 2, 04.1988, p. 165-176.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - From Contrast to Reinforcement

T2 - Role of Response Contingency in Anticipatory Contrast

AU - Flaherty, Charles F.

AU - Grigson, Patricia S.

PY - 1988/4

Y1 - 1988/4

N2 - Intake of a 0.15% saccharin solution is suppressed if access to the saccharin is followed by access to 32% sucrose in brief daily pairings. The present series of four experiments was concerned with factors that lead to this anticipatory contrast effect (suppressed saccharin intake) rather than a reinforcement effect. In Experiment 1, anticipatory contrast was obtained with an autoshaping procedure (no lick requirement on the initial tube), and degree of contrast did not vary as a function of intersolution interval in the range of 0-15 s. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that requirements of 10, 100, 200, or 400 licks on the first tube available led to a reinforcement effect in latency, but a requirement of 0 licks (autoshaping procedure) led to a contrast effect in licks and latency. In Experiment 4, a group with a 200-contingent-lick requirement showed a reinforcement effect in latency, but a group yoked to this contingent group showed a contrast effect in both latency and licks. Overall, the results suggest that anticipatory contrast occurs under conditions of a "relaxed" instrumental contingency. The data are discussed in terms of control of behavior by stimulus-stimulus, response-stimulus, and stimulus-response associations, and the results are related to behavioral contrast, to flavor-outcome associations, and to "misbehavior" produced by Pavlovian-instrumental interactions.

AB - Intake of a 0.15% saccharin solution is suppressed if access to the saccharin is followed by access to 32% sucrose in brief daily pairings. The present series of four experiments was concerned with factors that lead to this anticipatory contrast effect (suppressed saccharin intake) rather than a reinforcement effect. In Experiment 1, anticipatory contrast was obtained with an autoshaping procedure (no lick requirement on the initial tube), and degree of contrast did not vary as a function of intersolution interval in the range of 0-15 s. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that requirements of 10, 100, 200, or 400 licks on the first tube available led to a reinforcement effect in latency, but a requirement of 0 licks (autoshaping procedure) led to a contrast effect in licks and latency. In Experiment 4, a group with a 200-contingent-lick requirement showed a reinforcement effect in latency, but a group yoked to this contingent group showed a contrast effect in both latency and licks. Overall, the results suggest that anticipatory contrast occurs under conditions of a "relaxed" instrumental contingency. The data are discussed in terms of control of behavior by stimulus-stimulus, response-stimulus, and stimulus-response associations, and the results are related to behavioral contrast, to flavor-outcome associations, and to "misbehavior" produced by Pavlovian-instrumental interactions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0023988876&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0023988876&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/0097-7403.14.2.165

DO - 10.1037/0097-7403.14.2.165

M3 - Article

C2 - 3367102

AN - SCOPUS:0023988876

VL - 14

SP - 165

EP - 176

JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

SN - 0097-7403

IS - 2

ER -