Abstract
We present an algebraic model of resistance to extinction that is consistent with research on resistance to change. The model assumes that response strength is a power function of reinforcer rate and that extinction involves two additive, decremental processes: (1) the termination of the reinforcement contingency and (2) generalization decrement resulting from reinforcer omission. The model was supported by three experiments. In Experiment 1, 4 pigeons were trained on two-component multiple variable-interval (VI) 60-sec, VI 240-sec schedules. In two conditions, resistance to change was tested by terminating the response-reinforcer contingency and presenting response-independent reinforcers at the same rate as in training. In two further conditions, resistance to change was tested by prefeeding and by extinction. In Experiment 2, 6 pigeons were trained on two-component multiple VI 150-sec schedules with 8-sec or 2-sec reinforcers, and resistance to change was tested by terminating the response-reinforcer contingency in three conditions. In two of those conditions, brief delays were interposed between responses and response-independent reinforcers. In both Experiments 1 and 2, response rate was more resistant to change in the richer component, except for extinction in Experiment 1. In Experiment 3, 8 pigeons were trained on multiple VI 30-sec, VI 120-sec schedules. During extinction, half of the presentations of each component were accompanied by a novel stimulus to produce generalization decrement. The extinction data of Experiments 1 and 3 were well described by our model. The value of the exponent relating response strength and reinforcement was similar in all three experiments.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Catania, A. C. (1973). The nature of learning. In J. A. Nevin & G. S. Reynolds (Eds.),The study of behavior (pp. 30–68). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
Catania, A. C., &Keller, K. J. (1981). Contingency, contiguity, correlation, and the concept of causation. In P. Harzem & M. D. Zeiler (Eds.),Predictability, correlation, and contiguity (pp. 125–167). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
Clark, F. C. (1959). Some quantitative properties of operant extinction data.Psychological Reports,5, 131–139.
Cohen, S. L. (1998). Behavioral momentum: The effects of temporal separation of rates of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,69, 29–47.
Cohen, S. L., Riley, D. S., &Weigle, P. A. (1993). Tests of behavior momentum in simple and multiple schedules with rats and pigeons.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,60, 255–291.
Gibbon, J., Farrell, L., Locurto, C. M., Duncan, H. J., &Terrace, H. S. (1980). Partial reinforcement in autoshaping with pigeons.Animal Learning & Behavior,8, 45–59.
Grace, R. C., &Nevin, J. A. (1997). On the relation between preference and resistance to change.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,67, 43–65.
Guttman, N., &Kalish, H. I. (1956). Discriminability and stimulus generalization.Journal of Experimental Psychology,51, 79–88.
Harper, D.N., &McLean, A. P. (1992). Resistance to change and the law of effect.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,57, 317–337.
Hearst, E., Koresko, M. B., &Poppen, R. (1964). Stimulus generalization and the response-reinforcer contingency.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,7, 369–380.
Hull, C. L. (1943).Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Isaac, P. D. (1970). Linear regression, structural relations, and measurement error.Psychological Bulletin,74, 213–218.
Lattal, K. A. (1972). Response-reinforcer independence and conventional extinction after fixed-interval and variable-interval schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,18, 133–140.
Mackintosh, N. J. (1974).The psychology of animal learning. London: Academic Press.
Nevin, J. A. (1979). Reinforcement schedules and response strength. In M. D. Zeiler & P. Harzem (Eds.),Reinforcement and the organization of behaviour (pp. 117–158). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
Nevin, J. A. (1992). An integrative model for the study of behavioral momentum.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,57, 301–316.
Nevin, J. A., &Grace, R. C. (1999). Does resistance to change depend on the context of reinforcement?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,25, 256–268.
Nevin, J. A., &Grace, R. C. (2000a). Behavioral momentum and the law of effect.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,23, 73–130.
Nevin, J. A., &Grace, R. C. (2000b). Preference and resistance to change with constant-duration schedule components.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,74, 79–100.
Nevin, J. A., Mandell, C., &Atak, J. R. (1983). The analysis of behavioral momentum.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,39, 49–59.
Nevin, J. A., Mandell, C., &Yarensky, P. (1981). Response rate and resistance to change in chained schedules.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,7, 278–294.
Rescorla, R.A., &Skucy, J. C. (1969). Effect of response-independent reinforcers during extinction.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,67, 381–389.
Reynolds, G. S. (1963). Some limitations on contrast and induction during successive discrimination.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,6, 131–139.
Shettleworth, S., &Nevin, J. A. (1965). Relative rate of responding and relative magnitude of reinforcement in multiple schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,8, 199–202.
Staddon, J. E. R. (1975). Learning as adaptation. In W. K. Estes (Ed.),Handbook of learning and cognitive processes: Vol. 2. Conditioning and behavior theory (pp. 37–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Walker, D. J., &Branch, M. N. (1998). Effects of variable-interval value and amount of training on stimulus generalization.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,70, 139–163.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
Experiment 1 was conducted by A.P.M. and J.A.N. at the University of New Hampshire, Experiment 2 was conducted by A.P.M. at the University of Canterbury, and Experiment 3 was conducted by R.C.G. and J.A.N. at the University of New Hampshire, with support from NSF Grant IBN-9507584. A preliminary version of the present model was presented by J.A.N. and R.C.G. at the meetings of the Eastern Psychological Association in Boston, February 1998, and the data of Experiments 1 and 2 were presented at the New Zealand Behaviour Analysis Symposium, Hamilton, August 2000.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nevin, J.A., Mclean, A.P. & Grace, R.C. Resistance to extinction: contingency termination and generalization decrement. Animal Learning & Behavior 29, 176–191 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192826
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192826