Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Reinforcement Schedules01:24

Reinforcement Schedules

Positive reinforcement is a powerful method for teaching new behaviors to both animals and humans. B.F. Skinner demonstrated this with his experiments using rats in a Skinner box. When a rat pressed a lever, it received a food pellet. This immediate reward encouraged the rat to repeat the behavior. This method, where a reward follows every instance of the behavior, is known as continuous reinforcement. It is highly effective for establishing new behaviors quickly.
Once a behavior is learned,...
Timing and Consequences on Behavior01:08

Timing and Consequences on Behavior

In operant conditioning, the timing of reinforcement is crucial. For animals like rats and cats, immediate reinforcement (within a few seconds) is much more effective than delayed reinforcement. For example, a food reward for a rat needs to follow within 30 seconds of pressing a bar to be effective. 
Humans, however, can respond to delayed reinforcers. We often make decisions between immediate small rewards and delayed larger rewards. This ability to delay gratification is a significant factor...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Correction: Quantifying nonmnemonic strategies in two-alternative forced-choice delayed matching and nonmatching-to-position tasks in mice (Mus musculus) using automated video tracking technologies.

Learning & behavior·2026
Same author

Quantifying nonmnemonic strategies in two-alternative forced-choice delayed matching and nonmatching-to-position tasks in mice (Mus musculus) using automated video tracking technologies.

Learning & behavior·2026
Same author

Correction: Information-seeking in mice (Mus musculus) during visual discrimination: study using a distractor elimination paradigm.

Animal cognition·2025
Same author

Demand for heroin in rats: effects of non-drug alternative substitutes and complements.

Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology·2025
Same author

Time costs in the demand for cigarettes assessed using the cigarette purchase task-time (CPT-T).

Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology·2025
Same author

Strain differences between C57Bl/6 and DBA/2 mice (<i>Mus musculus</i>) in delayed matching and nonmatching-to-position tasks: impact of sample responses and delay intervals.

PeerJ·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 8, 2026

Automated, Quantitative Cognitive/Behavioral Screening of Mice: For Genetics, Pharmacology, Animal Cognition and Undergraduate Instruction
16:23

Automated, Quantitative Cognitive/Behavioral Screening of Mice: For Genetics, Pharmacology, Animal Cognition and Undergraduate Instruction

Published on: February 26, 2014

Schedule discrimination in a mixed schedule: implications for models of the variable-ratio, variable-interval rate

Alan Silberberg1, Kazuhiro Goto, Yosuke Hachiga

  • 1Department of Psychology, American University, Washington, DC 20016-8062, United States. asilber@american.edu

Behavioural Processes
|January 8, 2008
PubMed
Summary

Humans can distinguish between variable ratio (VR) and variable interval (VI) reinforcement schedules. This discrimination holds true even when schedules offer identical reinforcement rates and response times, demonstrating robust human operant behavior analysis.

More Related Videos

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons
07:13

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats
09:12

Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats

Published on: March 17, 2019

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 8, 2026

Automated, Quantitative Cognitive/Behavioral Screening of Mice: For Genetics, Pharmacology, Animal Cognition and Undergraduate Instruction
16:23

Automated, Quantitative Cognitive/Behavioral Screening of Mice: For Genetics, Pharmacology, Animal Cognition and Undergraduate Instruction

Published on: February 26, 2014

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons
07:13

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats
09:12

Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats

Published on: March 17, 2019

Area of Science:

  • Behavioral Psychology
  • Operant Conditioning
  • Human-Animal Interaction Studies

Background:

  • Operant schedules are fundamental to understanding behavior.
  • Discriminating between ratio and interval schedules is crucial for behavior analysis.
  • Previous research often uses animal models; human studies offer unique insights.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate humans' ability to discriminate between variable ratio (VR) and variable interval (VI) schedules.
  • To determine if discrimination is possible when reinforcement rates and interreinforcer intervals are matched.
  • To explore the role of response patterns in schedule discrimination.

Main Methods:

  • Experiment 1: Participants responded to a work key under VR12 or VI schedules, followed by a choice task involving monetary reinforcement.
  • Experiment 2: Modified VI schedule required specific interresponse times, mimicking VR patterns, with participants predicting schedule type.
  • Utilized mouse clicks and a point system (yen) to quantify responses and outcomes.

Main Results:

  • Participants successfully discriminated between VR and VI schedules in both experiments.
  • High accuracy was maintained even when schedules offered equivalent reinforcement rates and reinforced response times.
  • Subjects learned to predict schedule types based on response bout and pause sequences.

Conclusions:

  • Humans can effectively discriminate between ratio and interval schedules of reinforcement.
  • This discrimination is robust even under conditions designed to equate reinforcement delivery and response timing.
  • The findings highlight the sensitivity of human operant behavior to subtle schedule differences.