Abstract
The present experiment compared two methods of eliminating a classically conditioned response in dogs, extinction and reinforcement of nonsalivation, using both a within- and between-subjects experimental design. Eighteen dogs were trained for 16 days in Phase I, 16 days in Phase II, and 8 days in Phase III. In Phase I, each subject received classical conditioning training to two stimuli. In Phase II, Group 1 received extinction training to one stimulus and reinforcement of nonsalivation to the other stimulus. Group 2 received continued classical conditioning training to one stimulus and reinforcement on nonsalivation training to the other. Group 3 received continued classical conditioning training to one stimulus and extinction training to the other. In both the within- and between-subjects comparisons, responding to the stimulus associated with extinction was eliminated faster than responding to the stimulus associated with reinforcement of nonsalivation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Harman, R. E. Response elimination in concurrent and single operant situations with pigeons. Learning and Motivation, 1973, 4, 413–417.
Shapiro, M. M., & Herendeen, D. L. Food-reinforced inhibition of conditioned salivation in dogs. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, in press.
Shapiro, M. M., & Miller, T. M. On the relationship between conditioned and discriminative stimuli and between instrumental and consumatory responses. In W. Prokasv (Ed.),Classical conditioning A symposium. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1965.
Sheffield, F. D. Relation between classical and instrumental learning. In W. Prokasy (Ed.),Classical conditioning. A symposium. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1965.
Snow, M. E., & Uhl, C. N. Effects of omission, extinction and changeover delay procedures on free operant discrimination performance. Communications in Behavioral Biology, 1968, 5, No. 5.
Topping, J. S., Pickering, J. W., & Jackson, J. A. The differential effects of omission and extinction following DRL pretraining. Psychonomic Science, 1971, 24, 137–138.
Uhl, C. N., & Garcia, E. E. Comparison of omission with extinction in response elimination in rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1969, 69, 554–562.
Uhl, C. N., & Sherman, W. O. Comparison of combinations of omission, punishment, and extinction methods in response elimination in rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1971, 74, 59–65.
Zeiler, M. D. Other behavior: Consequences of reinforcing not responding. The Journal of Psychology, 1970, 74, 149–155.
Zeiler, M. D. Eliminating behavior with reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1971, 16, 401–405.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported in part by Grant No. HD-0133 from the National Institute of Health to the second author.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Herendeen, D.L., Shapiro, M.M. Extinction and food-reinforced inhibition of conditioned salivation in dogs. Animal Learning & Behavior 3, 103–106 (1975). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209109
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209109