In behavioral psychology, reinforcement is a consequence applied that will strengthen an In the behavioral sciences, the terms "positive" and "negative" refer when used in Stimuli, settings, and activities only fit the definition of reinforcers if the of stimuli (pleasant or aversive) in relation to reinforcement vs. punishment. The Difference between Positive/Negative Reinforcement and Positive/Negative The following are some examples of positive reinforcement. However, it is a double-edged sword. By definition, reinforcement is the act of strengthening a certain behavior so that it . It can be tricky to know the difference between negative and positive reinforcement in some cases.
Specific schedules of reinforcement reliably induce specific patterns of response, irrespective of the species being investigated including humans in some conditions. However, the quantitative properties of behavior under a given schedule depend on the parameters of the schedule, and sometimes on other, non-schedule factors. The orderliness and predictability of behavior under schedules of reinforcement was evidence for B.
Skinner 's claim that by using operant conditioning he could obtain "control over behavior", in a way that rendered the theoretical disputes of contemporary comparative psychology obsolete. The reliability of schedule control supported the idea that a radical behaviorist experimental analysis of behavior could be the foundation for a psychology that did not refer to mental or cognitive processes.
The reliability of schedules also led to the development of applied behavior analysis as a means of controlling or altering behavior. Many of the simpler possibilities, and some of the more complex ones, were investigated at great length by Skinner using pigeonsbut new schedules continue to be defined and investigated.
Simple schedules[ edit ] A chart demonstrating the different response rate of the four simple schedules of reinforcement, each hatch mark designates a reinforcer being given Ratio schedule — the reinforcement depends only on the number of responses the organism has performed.
Continuous reinforcement CRF — a schedule of reinforcement in which every occurrence of the instrumental response desired response is followed by the reinforcer. Simple schedules have a single rule to determine when a single type of reinforcer is delivered for a specific response. Fixed ratio FR — schedules deliver reinforcement after every nth response. Variable ratio schedule VR — reinforced on average every nth response, but not always on the nth response. Fixed interval FI — reinforced after n amount of time.
Variable interval VI — reinforced on an average of n amount of time, but not always exactly n amount of time. Reinforcement is delivered on the average after 4 minutes. Fixed time FT — Provides a reinforcing stimulus at a fixed time since the last reinforcement delivery, regardless of whether the subject has responded or not. In other words, it is a non-contingent schedule. Simple schedules are utilized in many differential reinforcement  procedures: Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior DRA - A conditioning procedure in which an undesired response is decreased by placing it on extinction or, less commonly, providing contingent punishment, while simultaneously providing reinforcement contingent on a desirable response.
An example would be a teacher attending to a student only when they raise their hand, while ignoring the student when he or she calls out. Differential reinforcement of other behavior DRO — Also known as omission training procedures, an instrumental conditioning procedure in which a positive reinforcer is periodically delivered only if the participant does something other than the target response.
An example would be reinforcing any hand action other than nose picking. An example would be reinforcing clapping to reduce nose picking Differential reinforcement of low response rate DRL — Used to encourage low rates of responding.
It is like an interval schedule, except that premature responses reset the time required between behavior. If you ask more often, I will give you none.
It is like an interval schedule, except that a minimum number of responses are required in the interval in order to receive reinforcement. Ratio schedules produce higher rates of responding than interval schedules, when the rates of reinforcement are otherwise similar. Variable schedules produce higher rates and greater resistance to extinction than most fixed schedules. The variable ratio schedule produces both the highest rate of responding and the greatest resistance to extinction for example, the behavior of gamblers at slot machines.
Fixed schedules produce "post-reinforcement pauses" PRPwhere responses will briefly cease immediately following reinforcement, though the pause is a function of the upcoming response requirement rather than the prior reinforcement.
Organisms whose schedules of reinforcement are "thinned" that is, requiring more responses or a greater wait before reinforcement may experience "ratio strain" if thinned too quickly. This produces behavior similar to that seen during extinction. Usually higher ratio requirement causes longer post-reinforcement pauses to occur. Partial reinforcement schedules are more resistant to extinction than continuous reinforcement schedules. Ratio schedules are more resistant than interval schedules and variable schedules more resistant than fixed ones.
Momentary changes in reinforcement value lead to dynamic changes in behavior. There are many possibilities; among those most often used are: Alternative schedules — A type of compound schedule where two or more simple schedules are in effect and whichever schedule is completed first results in reinforcement.
Multiple schedules — Two or more schedules alternate over time, with a stimulus indicating which is in force. Reinforcement is delivered if the response requirement is met while a schedule is in effect.
FR4 when given a whistle and FI6 when given a bell ring. Mixed schedules — Either of two, or more, schedules may occur with no stimulus indicating which is in force. FI6 and then VR3 without any stimulus warning of the change in schedule. Concurrent schedules — A complex reinforcement procedure in which the participant can choose any one of two or more simple reinforcement schedules that are available simultaneously.
Organisms are free to change back and forth between the response alternatives at any time. Concurrent-chain schedule of reinforcement — A complex reinforcement procedure in which the participant is permitted to choose during the first link which of several simple reinforcement schedules will be in effect in the second link. Once a choice has been made, the rejected alternatives become unavailable until the start of the next trial.
Interlocking schedules — A single schedule with two components where progress in one component affects progress in the other component. In an interlocking FR 60 FI s schedule, for example, each response subtracts time from the interval component such that each response is "equal" to removing two seconds from the FI schedule. Chained schedules — Reinforcement occurs after two or more successive schedules have been completed, with a stimulus indicating when one schedule has been completed and the next has started Example: On an FR 10 schedule in the presence a red light, a pigeon pecks a green disc 10 times; then, a yellow light indicates an FR 3 schedule is active; after the pigeon pecks a yellow disc 3 times, a green light to indicates a VI 6-s schedule is in effect; if this were the final schedule in the chain, the pigeon would be reinforced for pecking a green disc on a VI 6-s schedule; however, all schedule requirements in the chain must be met before a reinforcer is provided.
Tandem schedules — Reinforcement occurs when two or more successive schedule requirements have been completed, with no stimulus indicating when a schedule has been completed and the next has started.
VR 10, after it is completed the schedule is changed without warning to FR 10, after that it is changed without warning to FR 16, etc. At the end of the series of schedules, a reinforcer is finally given. Higher-order schedules — completion of one schedule is reinforced according to a second schedule; e. Superimposed schedules[ edit ] The psychology term superimposed schedules of reinforcement refers to a structure of rewards where two or more simple schedules of reinforcement operate simultaneously.
Reinforcers can be positive, negative, or both. An example is a person who comes home after a long day at work. The behavior of opening the front door is rewarded by a big kiss on the lips by the person's spouse and a rip in the pants from the family dog jumping enthusiastically.
Another example of superimposed schedules of reinforcement is a pigeon in an experimental cage pecking at a button. The pecks deliver a hopper of grain every 20th peck, and access to water after every pecks. Superimposed schedules of reinforcement are a type of compound schedule that evolved from the initial work on simple schedules of reinforcement by B.
Skinner and his colleagues Skinner and Ferster, They demonstrated that reinforcers could be delivered on schedules, and further that organisms behaved differently under different schedules. Rather than a reinforcer, such as food or water, being delivered every time as a consequence of some behavior, a reinforcer could be delivered after more than one instance of the behavior.
For example, a pigeon may be required to peck a button switch ten times before food appears. This is a "ratio schedule". Also, a reinforcer could be delivered after an interval of time passed following a target behavior. An example is a rat that is given a food pellet immediately following the first response that occurs after two minutes has elapsed since the last lever press.
Reinforcement - Wikipedia
This is called an "interval schedule". Each subject contributed two complete matching functions, one involving homogeneous all positive reinforcement, and one involving heterogeneous negative vs. Of primary interest was whether systematic bias would be observed. The informed consent agreement indicated that money earnings in the experiment depended upon performance and that the investigation was expected to require up to 45 total hours to complete.
When the data were collected, the U. Each participant received her total earnings after discharge from the study. One volunteer was removed from the investigation because of erratic attendance and performance in baseline conditions; no data are reported for this individual.
One participant S withdrew prematurely, citing boredom with the experimental task, leaving behind a limited series of conditions that are described here. The remaining participants S and S completed as many conditions as permitted by their speed in achieving asymptotic performance and by their respective schedules during the academic term during which they worked.
To readers who are accustomed to working with nonhuman subjects, the resulting durations of participation Appendix A may seem brief; it should be noted, however, that participant retention is a recurring challenge in human operant research e. Pilgrim,and most human operant experiments are considerably briefer than the present one.
Experimental sessions were conducted in three 3-m by 4-m rooms, each equipped with a table, chair, color computer monitor, and mouse. To mask external noise, soft instrumental music played continuously during experimental sessions from stereo speakers affixed to the ceiling of the rooms.
Procedure Participants visited the laboratory 4 or 5 days per week. Experimental sessions lasted 10 min and were separated by short breaks of about 2 to 5 min during which an experimenter recorded the data and initiated the next session. Participants completed about eight sessions during each 2-hr visit to the laboratory. Clicking the box cleared the prompts and produced two rectangles, or work areas, each approximately 13 cm wide by 17 cm high, and each occupying one side of the screen.
An arrow-shaped cursor indicated the virtual position of the mouse. Within each of the two work areas was a small approximately 1. Throughout the session, targets moved in random directions at a rate of about 1. Clicks within the borders of a target registered responses upon which the reinforcement schedules were based.
Clicks elsewhere were ineffective and were not counted. At the start of a session, both work areas featured a white background. Reinforcement schedules associated with each side continued to operate. Changeover Cost We were concerned about using a changeover delay c. Under negative reinforcement, the common practice of suspending reinforcement-schedule timers for a period just after a switch between schedules would create a safety period during which no money losses could be experienced, thereby possibly reinforcing changeovers.
A fixed-ratio changeover requirement was programmed instead. Located between the two work areas was a 2. A click on the active target prior to completing five consecutive changeover responses reset the CO counter to zero. Session and reinforcement timers continued to operate while CO responding took place. Cycle schedules function similarly to interval schedules in that reinforcement is contingent upon a single response occurring at a specific point in time Baron, In interval schedules, reinforcement is contingent on the first response that occurs after a given time period elapses; responses during the preceding time period are ineffective.
However, it may also have powerful and lasting side effects. For example, an aversive stimulus used to punish a particular behavior may also elicit a strong emotional response that may suppress unpunished behavior and become associated with situational stimuli through classical conditioning. Cognitive Sciences Stack Exchange.
Retrieved 10 May Importance of contingency and contiguity[ edit ] One variable affecting punishment is contingencywhich is defined as the dependency of events. A behavior may be dependent on a stimulus or dependent on a response.
The purpose of punishment is to reduce a behavior, and the degree to which punishment is effective in reducing a targeted behavior is dependent on the relationship between the behavior and a punishment. For example, if a rat receives an aversive stimulus, such as a shock each time it presses a lever, then it is clear that contingency occurs between lever pressing and shock. In this case, the punisher shock is contingent upon the appearance of the behavior lever pressing.