Related Experiment Videos
Induction when rats lick for 1% liquid-sucrose reinforcement.
Jeffrey N Weatherly1, Kelsey K Lang, Brent M King
1Department of Psychology, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202-8380, USA. jeffrey_weatherly@und.nodak.edu
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (2006)
|May 19, 2006
Summary
Rats show increased licking (induction) for lower-value sucrose rewards when higher-value rewards are anticipated, challenging response-type theories. Procedural factors, like reinforcer location, influence contrast and induction effects in animal behavior studies.
Area of Science:
- Behavioral neuroscience
- Animal learning and behavior
Background:
- Previous studies indicated that rats exhibit response rate decrease (contrast) or increase (induction) based on the dependent measure (licking vs. lever pressing) when anticipating different sucrose concentrations.
- The current research explores the conditions under which induction can be observed with licking as the measure and if contrast and induction can occur simultaneously.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate if induction occurs when licking is the dependent measure.
- To determine if induction in lever pressing and contrast in licking can be concurrently observed.
- To examine the influence of procedural details on contrast and induction effects.
Main Methods:
- Rats were trained to respond for sucrose rewards.
- Dependent measures included licking rate and instrumental lever pressing.
- Sucrose concentrations were varied (1% and 32%) to create conditions for contrast and induction.
- Reinforcer delivery location was manipulated across experiments.
Main Results:
- Experiment 1 and 2 demonstrated induction, showing increased licking for 1% sucrose when 32% sucrose was anticipated, even when consumption location varied.
- Experiment 3 showed both lever pressing and licking increased for 1% sucrose when 32% sucrose was upcoming, indicating concurrent induction.
- Results suggest procedural factors, not just response type, dictate contrast vs. induction.
Conclusions:
- The type of instrumental response is not the sole factor determining contrast or induction.
- Reinforcer delivery location and other procedural elements significantly influence observed behavioral effects.
- Associative learning processes appear to underlie the induction of responding for lower-value rewards.