Abstract
Button pressing by 44 college students intermittently produced points and the words "GOOD" or "POOR" on a computer screen. The events were arranged according to a paced random-interval 10-s schedule in which the target interresponse-time categories were 1 to 3, 3 to 5, or 6 to 12 s. The degree to which instructions specified certain aspects of the contingency (e.g., whether response spacing was critical) was also varied, and in some conditions the experimenter prompted specifically paced responses during the first 2 min of the session. The procedures shaped the local patterning of behavior of some subjects in less than 30 min of exposure to the contingencies. Most subjects who, in a postexperimental questionnaire, accurately identified the schedule contingencies also responded more accurately than those whose verbal descriptions were inaccurate or imprecise.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
