Buscador de artigos científicos

Many everyday choices are associated with both delayed and probabilistic outcomes. The temporal attention hypothesis suggests that individuals' decision making can be improved by focusing attention on temporally distal events and implies that environmental manipulations that bring temporally distal outcomes into focus may alter an individual's degree of discounting. One such manipulation, episodic future thinking, has shown to lower discount rates; however, several questions remain about the applicability of episodic future thinking to domains other than delay discounting. The present experiments examine the effects of a modified episodic‐future‐thinking procedure in which participants viewed age‐progressed computer‐generated images of themselves and answered questions related to their future, on probability discounting in the context of both a delayed health gain and loss. Results indicate that modified episodic future thinking effectively altered individuals' degree of discounting in the predicted directions and demonstrate the applicability of episodic future thinking to decision making of socially significant outcomes.

This secondary data analysis examined effects of an abstinence contingency on participation in a therapeutic workplace. Participants exposed to a pay reset after drug use did not differ in overall attendance from participants who were not exposed to a pay reset after drug use; however, they initially worked less after a pay reset than participants who did not receive a pay reset, and their attendance increased as their pay increased. Overall participation was not influenced by the abstinence contingency, but transient decreases in attendance occurred.

Standard operating procedures have been developed to train Cricetomys to locate humans in collapsed structures and return to the release point on command. The present study demonstrated that the schedule of reinforcement for target location influences the rats' performance. Rats required more time to locate targets when no reinforcement was arranged for target location but less time to return to the release point. These findings suggest that training conditions should be based on the priority assigned to target location and return in an operational scenario.

Three experiments explored the impact of different reinforcer rates for alternative behavior ( DRA ) on the suppression and post‐ DRA relapse of target behavior, and the persistence of alternative behavior. All experiments arranged baseline, intervention with extinction of target behavior concurrently with DRA , and post‐treatment tests of resurgence or reinstatement, in two‐ or three‐component multiple schedules. Experiment 1, with pigeons, arranged high or low baseline reinforcer rates; both rich and lean DRA schedules reduced target behavior to low levels. When DRA was discontinued, the magnitude of relapse depended on both baseline reinforcer rate and the rate of DRA . Experiment 2, with children exhibiting problem behaviors, arranged an intermediate baseline reinforcer rate and rich or lean signaled DRA . During treatment, both rich and lean DRA rapidly reduced problem behavior to low levels, but post‐treatment relapse was generally greater in the DRA ‐rich than the DRA ‐lean component. Experiment 3, with pigeons, repeated the low‐baseline condition of Experiment 1 with signaled DRA as in Experiment 2. Target behavior decreased to intermediate levels in both DRA ‐rich and DRA ‐lean components. Relapse, when it occurred, was directly related to DRA reinforcer rate as in Experiment 2. The post‐treatment persistence of alternative behavior was greater in the DRA ‐rich component in Experiment 1, whereas it was the same or greater in the signaled‐ DRA ‐lean component in Experiments 2 and 3. Thus, infrequent signaled DRA may be optimal for effective clinical treatment.

Behavior and events distributed in time can serve as markers that signal delays to future events. The majority of timing research has focused on how behavior changes as the time to some event, usually food availability, decreases. The primary objective of the two experiments presented here was to assess how behavior changes as time passes between two time markers when the first time marker was manipulated but the second, food delivery, was held constant. Pigeons were exposed to fixed‐interval, response‐initiated fixed‐interval, and signaled response‐initiated fixed‐interval 15‐ and 30‐s schedules of reinforcement. In Experiment 1, first‐response latencies were systematically shorter in the signaled response‐initiated schedules than response‐initiated schedules, suggesting that the first response was a more effective time marker when it was signaled. In Experiment 2, responding in no‐food (i.e. “peak”) trials indicated that timing accuracy was equivalent in the three schedule types. Compared to fixed interval schedules, timing precision was reduced in the signaled response‐initiated schedules and was lowest in response‐initiated schedules. Results from Experiments 1 and 2 coupled with previous research suggest that the overall “informativeness” of a time marker relative to other events and behaviors in the environment may determine its efficacy.

Effects of incorrect or partial implementation (poor treatment integrity) on response cost are largely unknown. We evaluated reduced treatment integrity during response cost on rates of 2 concurrently available responses. College students earned points by clicking on either a black circle or a red circle on a computer screen. Experiment 1 compared 2 types of treatment‐integrity failures (omission and commission errors) across 2 levels of integrity (20% and 50%). Compared to 100% integrity conditions, omission errors did not suppress responding to the same extent, and commission errors reduced target responding but also decreased rates of alternative behavior. Experiment 2 compared the effects of 20% and 50% omission errors within subjects. Implementation at 50% integrity adequately suppressed responding, but treatment effects were lost at 20% integrity. There may be a critical level at which response cost must be implemented to suppress responding, which has important implications for application.

Researchers have shown that both differential reinforcement and response cost within token economies are similarly effective for changing the behavior of individuals in a group context (e.g., Donaldson, DeLeon , Fisher, & Kahng, 2014; Iwata & Bailey, 1974). In addition, these researchers have empirically evaluated preference for these procedures. However, few previous studies have evaluated the individual effects of these procedures both in group contexts and in the absence of peers. Therefore, we replicated and extended previous research by determining the individual effects and preferences of differential reinforcement and response cost under both group and individualized conditions. Results demonstrated that the procedures were equally effective for increasing on‐task behavior during group and individual instruction for most children, and preference varied across participants. In addition, results were consistent across participants who experienced the procedures in group and individualized settings.

The concept of emitted behavior was formulated as a part of the original argument for the validity of a new kind of learning called operant conditioning. The rationale for operant conditioning contrasted it with Pavlovian or classical conditioning, which was (and remains) fundamentally based on responses to conditioned and unconditioned stimuli. Classical conditioned responses were said to be elicited . In contrast, operant behavior was viewed as emitted and controlled primarily by response consequences rather than antecedents. I argue that the distinction between emitted and elicited behavior is no longer warranted for three major reasons. First, the distinction was based on a view of Pavlovian conditioning that is no longer viable. Second, the distinction is incompatible with both empirical data and contemporary conceptualizations of operant behavior. Third, the only way to overcome these problems is to define emitted and elicited in terms of the type of conditioning (operant and classical) that produces these behaviors, but that approach makes the definitions circular and does not avoid implications of the terms that are misleading and counterproductive in light of contemporary research and thinking.

We evaluated the emergence of untaught second‐language skills following directly taught listener and intraverbal responses. Three preschool children were taught first‐language (English) listener responses (e.g., “Point to the horse”) and second‐language (Welsh) intraverbal responses (e.g., “What is horse in Welsh?” [ceffyl]). After intervention, increases in untaught second‐language tacts (e.g., “What is this in Welsh?” [ceffyl]) and listener responses (e.g., “Point to the ceffyl”) were observed for all 3 participants.