Influência da relação resposta/reforço na persistência comportamental

André Connor de Méo Luiz; Myenne Mieko Ayres Tsutsumi; Juliana Suemi Gomes Shirakawa

doi:10.31211/rpics.2024.10.1.337

Authors

André Connor de Méo Luiz Instituto Continuum https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3092-324X
Myenne Mieko Ayres Tsutsumi Instituto Continuum
Juliana Suemi Gomes Shirakawa Instituto Continuum https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8890-2604

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31211/rpics.2024.10.1.337

Keywords:

Resistance to Change, Persistence, Reinforcement, Response/Reinforcement Ratio, Experimental study

Abstract

Background : The Behavioral Momentum Theory proposes that behavioral persistence results from the stimulus-stimulus relationship, independent of the response-stimulus relationship. However, recent studies indicate limitations in this theory, suggesting that persistence can be influenced by additional variables not originally considered. Objective: This study investigated persistence as a function of the number of responses emitted per reinforcement obtained, specifically the response/reinforcement ratio (R/SR). Methods: Experiments 1 and 2: University students were exposed to a multiple schedule with three components, each requiring different R/SR ratios. These schedules varied the response requirement for each reinforcement, evaluating persistence under different R/SR conditions. Experiment 3: Participants were exposed to a multiple schedule with three components, where each component operated under a tandem variable-interval fixed-ratio schedule. Different amounts of responses per reinforcement were required in each component. Results: The results indicated that, within the experimental parameters used, the R/SR ratio did not significantly affect behavioral persistence. Conclusions: This study highlights the complexity of variables involved in behavioral persistence and the need to broaden the analysis of these variables. The R/SR ratio is complex and interdependent with other aspects of behavior. Future research should explore the effects of the R/SR ratio on behavioral persistence through a continuous line of investigation, composed of experiments that separately control various behavioral variables. Understanding these interactions could transform the scientific approach to behavioral persistence, allowing for more precise and effective interventions and contributing to significant advances in areas such as education, psychotherapy, and behavior modification.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aló, R. M., Abreu-Rodrigues, J., Souza, A. S., & Cançado, C. R. X. (2015). The persistence of fixed-ratio and differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule performances. Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis, 41(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.5514/rmac.v41.i1.63686

Bell, M. C. (1999). Pavlovian contingencies and resistance to change in a multiple schedule. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72(1), 81–96. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1999.72-81

Blackman, D. (1968). Response rate, reinforcement frequency, and conditioned suppression. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 11(5), 503–516. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1968.11-503

Cohen, S. L. (1996). Behavioral momentum of typing behavior in college students. Journal of Behavior Analysis and Therapy, 1, 36–51. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294690441_Behavioral_momentum_of_typing_behavior_in_college_students

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(2), 255–291. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1993.60-255

Craig, A. R., Nevin, J. A., & Odum, A. L. (2014). Behavioral momentum and resistance to change. In The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Operant and Classical Conditioning (pp. 249–274). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118468135.ch11

Cumming, W. W., & Schoenfeld, W. N. (1960). Behavior stability under extended exposure to a time-correlated reinforcement contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 3(1), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1960.3-71

Dias, R. C. Q. (2019). Relações resposta-reforço similares, taxa de respostas e resistência à mudança [Dissertação de mestrado, Universidade de Brasília, UnB]. https://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/35010

Estabile, L. C. (2021). Resistência à mudança em função de diferentes lacunas temporais entre linha de base e teste e diferentes taxas de reforço [Dissertação de Mestrado, Universidade Estadual de Londrina, UEL. https://www.uel.br/pos/pgac/wp-content/uploads/biblioteca/Dissertacao%20Laira%20Cristine%20Estabile.PDF

Felton, M., & Lyon, D. O. (1966). The post-reinforcement pause. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9(2), 131–134. https://doi.org/10.1037/10627-000

Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. Appleton-Century-Crofts. https://doi.org/10.1037/10627-000

Grace, R. C., Schwendiman, J. W., & Nevin, J. A. (1998). Effects of unsignaled delay of reinforcement on preference and resistance to change. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 69(3), 247–261. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1998.69-247

Harper, D. N. (1996). Response-independent food delivery and behavioral resistance to change. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65(3), 549–560. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1996.65-549

Harper, D. N., & McLean, A. P. (1992). Resistance to change and the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57(3), 317–337. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1992.57-317

Herrnstein, R. J. (1974). Formal properties of the matching law. I, 159–164.

Igaki, T., & Sakagami, T. (2004). Resistance to change in goldfish. Behavioural Processes, 66(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2004.01.009

Kuroda, T. (2020). Behavior is quantifiable, predictable, and controllable. 2020 IEEE 2nd Global Conference on Life Sciences and Technologies (LifeTech), 370–372. https://doi.org/10.1109/LifeTech48969.2020.1570618763

Kuroda, T., Cançado, C. R. X., & Podlesnik, C. A. (2016). Resistance to change and resurgence in humans engaging in a computer task. Behavioural Processes, 125, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2016.01.010

Kuroda, T., Cook, J. E., & Lattal, K. A. (2018). Baseline response rates affect resistance to change. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 109(1), 164–175. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.285

Lattal, K. A. (1989). Contingencies on response rate and resistance to change. Learning and Motivation, 20(2), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/0023-9690(89)90017-9

Luce, S. C., Christian, W. P., Lipsker, L. E., & Hall, R. V. (1981). Response cost: A case for specificity. The Behavior Analyst, 4(1), 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391855

Luiz, A., Costa, C. E., Banaco, R. A., & Tsutsumi, M. M. A. (2021). Effects of different physical-effort requirements on resistance to extinction in humans. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 00(00), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/15021149.2021.1932344

Luiz, A., Costa, C. E., & Cançado, C. R. X. (2019). Aspectos Históricos, Teóricos e Metodológicos da Teoria do Momentum Comportamental. Perspectivas Em Análise Do Comportamento, 10(1), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.18761/PAC.TAC.2019.007

Luiz, A., Costa, C. E., dos Santos, J. R., & Tsutsumi, M. M. A. (2020). Resistance to change as function of different physical-effort requirements in humans. Behavioural Processes, 176, 104123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2020.104123

Mace, F. C., Lalli, J. S., Shea, M. C., Lalli, E. P., West, B. J., Roberts, M., & Nevin, J. A. (1990). The momentum of human behavior in a natural setting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 54(3), 163–172. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1990.54-163

Nevin, J. A. (1974). Response strength in multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21(3), 389–408. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1974.21-389

Nevin, J. A., & Grace, R. C. (2000). Behavioral momentum and the Law of Effect. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(1), 73–130. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00002405

Nevin, J. A., Mandell, C., & Atak, J. R. (1983). The analysis of behavioral momentum. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1983.39-49

Nevin, J. A., & Wacker, D. P. (2013). Response strength and persistence. In G. J. Madden, W. V. Dube, T. D. Hackenberg, G. P. Hanley, & K. A. Lattal (Eds.), APA handbook of behavior analysis, Vol. 2. Translating principles into practice. (pp. 109–128). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13938-005

Pinkston, J. W., & Foss, E. K. (2018). The role of response force on the persistence and structure of behavior during extinction. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 109(1), 194–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.306

Podlesnik, C. A., & Kelley, M. E. (2017). Resurgence: Response competition, stimulus control, and reinforcer control. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 102(2), 231–240. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.102

Sanches de Oliveira, G., & Baggs, E. (2023). Psychology’s WEIRD Problems. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009303538

Shahan, T. A., & Sweeney, M. M. (2011). A model of resurgence based on behavioral momentum theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 95(1), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2011.95-91

Soares, P. G., Costa, C. E., Aló, R. M., Luiz, A., & Cunha, T. R. de L. (2017). Custo da resposta: Como tem sido definido e estudado? Perspectivas em Análise do Comportamento, 8(2), 258–268. https://doi.org/10.18761/PAC.2017.020

Weiner, H. (1963). Response cost and the aversive control of human operant behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 6(3), 415–421. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1963.6-415

Weiner, H. (1969). Controlling human fixed‐interval performance1. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12(3), 349–373. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1969.12-349