Secondary Reinforcement and the Discrimination Hypothesis

The purposes of this experiment are further investigation of: the discrimination hypothesis vs secondary reinforcement positions with respect to resistance to extinction; the role of explicit vs non-explicit discrimination training in resistance to extinction. One group of 32 rats was given explicit discrimination training in an L-type runway involving two goal boxes of different brightness. A second group of 32 Ss had non-explicit discrimination training, i.e., an unfastened card in the goal box entrances concealed the cues until S entered the goal box. Ss were always reinforced in the goal box of one brightness and never reinforced in the goal box of the other brightness. During extinction 16 Ss in each of the above groups were extinguished with the positive cue and 16 with the negative cue. Half of these positive cue and negative cue Ss encountered a card in the goal box entrance, and the rest did not. The results showed no significant difference in alley-running or arm-running times in extinction between the positive and negative cue Ss. Using number of trials to a criterion of two successive running times, Ss extinguished with the positive cue showed greater resistance to extinction. The type of discrimination training did not influence extinction results significantly, using running time or number of trials as a criterion. The results were interpreted as generally incompatible with the discrimination hypothesis prediction and only partially in support of a secondary reinforcement position

Audiology · Extinction (optical mineralogy · Optics · Reinforcement · Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies · Psychology · Social Psychology