Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Reinforcement Schedules

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 Behavior

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

Inflammation modifies breathing phenotype in mice with epilepsy.

Journal of neuroinflammation·2026

Same author

Benefits of Meeting the Healthy People 2030 Youth Sports Participation Target.

American journal of preventive medicine·2024

Same author

Selective reactions to different killer whale call categories in two delphinid species.

The Journal of experimental biology·2018

Same author

The effects of climate change on harp seals (Pagophilus groenlandicus).

PloS one·2012

Same author

Stimulus control in fixed interfood intervals.

Learning & behavior·2008

Same author

Dynamical concurrent schedules.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2003

Same journal

The Genoeconomics of Impulsive Intertemporal Choice: A Critical Review.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

Shaping the extinction burst: Increasing its probability and preventing its emergence across topographies.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

Evaluating the combined effects of effort and probability on monetary discounting.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

An improved translational approach to studying persistence-strengthening effects of differential reinforcement of alternative behavior.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

Interactions between the effects of food and water motivating operations on concurrent food- and water-reinforced responding in mice.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same journal

Odor-visual and visual-visual matching to sample with dogs.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 27, 2026

Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats

Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats

Published on: March 17, 2019

Interresponse time structures in variable-ratio and variable-interval schedules.

Matthew T Bowers¹, Jade Hill, William L Palya

¹Department of Psychology, Jacksonville State University, Jacksonville, AL 36265, USA.

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

|December 17, 2008

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Pigeon key pecking behavior under different schedules showed varied response time patterns. Variable-interval schedules produced continuous distributions, unlike other schedules, challenging common analysis methods.

More Related Videos

The 5-Choice Serial Reaction Time Task: A Task of Attention and Impulse Control for Rodents

The 5-Choice Serial Reaction Time Task: A Task of Attention and Impulse Control for Rodents

Published on: August 10, 2014

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 27, 2026

Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats

Three Laboratory Procedures for Assessing Different Manifestations of Impulsivity in Rats

Published on: March 17, 2019

The 5-Choice Serial Reaction Time Task: A Task of Attention and Impulse Control for Rodents

The 5-Choice Serial Reaction Time Task: A Task of Attention and Impulse Control for Rodents

Published on: August 10, 2014

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Area of Science:

Behavioral science
Animal behavior
Operant conditioning

Background:

Understanding interresponse times (IRTs) is crucial for analyzing operant behavior.
Previous research often assumes dichotomous engagement and disengagement bouts.
Log survivor analysis and double exponential fits are common IRT analysis methods.

Purpose of the Study:

To investigate the interresponse-time structures of pigeon key pecking under various reinforcement schedules.
To assess the applicability of standard IRT analysis methods across different schedules.
To determine if operant behavior can be consistently dichotomized into engagement and disengagement.

Main Methods:

Pigeons were subjected to three reinforcement schedules: variable-ratio, variable-interval, and variable-interval plus linear feedback.
Interresponse times were systematically recorded and analyzed for each schedule.
Data were examined for patterns indicative of distinct engagement and disengagement periods.

Main Results:

Variable-ratio and variable-interval plus linear feedback schedules produced distinct short IRTs and broader distributions of longer IRTs.
Variable-interval schedules, however, yielded a more continuous distribution of interresponse times.
These differing patterns suggest schedule-dependent variations in behavior structure.

Conclusions:

The structure of interresponse times varies significantly across different reinforcement schedules.
A log survivor analysis or double exponential fit may not be universally applicable for dichotomizing operant behavior.
Findings challenge the assumption of consistent engagement/disengagement bouts in pigeon key pecking behavior.