|
| Some Topics on Rule-Governed Behavior: Behavioral Momentum, Shaping of Verbal Behavior, and Operant Blocking |
| Saturday, May 29, 2004 |
| 1:00 PM–2:20 PM |
| Independence West |
| Area: VBC; Domain: Applied Research |
| Chair: Elizabethann M. O'Shields (West Virginia University) |
| Discussant: Mark Galizio (University of North Carolina, Wilmington) |
| Abstract: Some Topics on Rule-Governed Behavior: Behavioral Momentum, Shaping of Verbal Behavior, and Operant Blocking |
| |
| Rule-Governed Behavior and Insensitivity to Contingencies: The Role of Behavioral Momentum |
| CHRISTOPHER A. PODLESNIK (Utah State University), Philip N. Chase (West Virginia University) |
| Abstract: The current experiment examined whether instructed behavior's reduced sensitivity could be related to behavioral momentum. Two groups of subjects were exposed to a variable-interval 30-s schedule of reinforcement with and without a disrupter. One group received minimal instructions (MI) that told them only that they could earn points exchangeable for money. The second group received a complete instruction (CI) that described the topography of the target response that was yoked to an MI subjects’ stable baseline response rates. Disruption conditions introduced a video presentation of popular television situation comedy. The response rates under the disruption condition for the CI subjects were more resistant to change than the MI subjects in 14 out of 15 disruption sessions. These findings are discussed in terms of the history of reinforcement for rule following. It is concluded that behavioral momentum may be increased by instructions and that the procedures used to test momentum provide an additional test for differences between instructed and contingency-governed behavior. |
| |
| Examining the Effects of Different Methods of Rule Acquisition on Schedule Performance |
| ELIZABETHANN M. O'SHIELDS (West Virginia University), Philip N. Chase (West Virginia University) |
| Abstract: The purpose of this experiment was to analyze the effects of different methods of rule acquisition on sensitivity to changing contingencies. The procedure was a systematic replication of Catania, Matthews, and Shimoff (1982). Twelve college students responded on a MULT VR 40-DRL 6-s schedule and were asked to guess the best way to earn points on each component. Subjects divided into four conditions, No Guessing, Non-Differential Points for Guessing, Shaped Guessing and Instructed Guessing. Although the different methods of rule acquisition did not have an effect on schedule sensitivity, there were differences in the influence on non-verbal responding. |
| |
| An Operant Blocking Account of Rule-Governed Behavior’s Insensitivity to Local Contingencies of Reinforcement |
| MARTA LEON (West Virginia University), Philip N. Chase (West Virginia University) |
| Abstract: The present experiment examined whether operant blocking could explain situations when instructed behavior is insensitivity to contingencies. Subjects were randomly assigned to three groups and were trained to respond to a mult DRL 4-s/FR18 schedule. Subjects in the Blocking and Unblocking groups received schedule instructions. Subjects in the Minimally Instructed group received only general instructions. Arbitrary stimuli were presented to all three groups that were correlated with the schedule components. For the Unblocking group, the introduction of these stimuli also was accompanied by a change in the magnitude of reinforcement. Sensitivity and blocking were assessed by first reversing the relations between stimuli and contingencies and then reversing the instruction-contingency relation. Behavior was not affected when the stimuli-contingencies relations were reversed for any of the three groups. When the instruction-contingencies relations were reversed, however, the behavior of the Unblocking group regained sensitivity faster than behavior of the Blocking group indicating moderate support for a blocking account of insensitivity. |
|
| |