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

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...

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,...

Primary and Secondary Reinforcers

Primary and Secondary Reinforcers

In psychology, reinforcement is a key concept in behavior modification. B.F. Skinner demonstrated this with his experiments involving rats in what is known as a Skinner box. The rats learned to press a lever to receive food, a primary reinforcer that fulfilled their innate need for nourishment.
Effective reinforcers for humans vary depending on the individual and the context. Primary reinforcers, such as food, water, sleep, shelter, and pleasure, have inherent value and satisfy basic biological...

Incentive Theory: Pull Theory of Motivation

Incentive Theory: Pull Theory of Motivation

Incentive theory, or the "pull theory" of motivation, suggests that external rewards primarily drive behavior. Individuals are motivated to engage in activities when they anticipate a desirable outcome. This is why people often work hard for promotions or study intensively to achieve high grades. These incentives can be tangible, physical rewards such as money or promotions, or intangible, non-physical rewards like praise and social recognition.
The theory differentiates between...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

The freedom to choose may be an artifact of a preference for spatial location.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2026

Same author

Episodic memory: Rats can remember the context.

Current biology : CB·2026

Same author

Episodic memory in animals?

Translational neuroscience·2025

Same author

Ephemeral reward task: Why is it so difficult for pigeons to learn it?

Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition·2025

Same author

Peter Urcuioli's lasting contribution: Animal memory research and an important model of stimulus class formation.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior·2025

Same author

Complex relationship between response rate and preference in pigeons: Williams (1992) revisited.

Learning & behavior·2024

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 29, 2025

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

What makes the ephemeral reward task so difficult?

Peyton M Mueller¹, Daniel N Peng¹, William C Burroughs¹

¹Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky.

Journal of Comparative Psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983)

|April 4, 2024

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Humans struggle with the ephemeral reward task, failing to consistently choose the optimal option even with delays. This suggests task complexity, not impulsivity, hinders human learning in this scenario.

More Related Videos

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task

Published on: January 9, 2016

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 29, 2025

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task

Published on: January 9, 2016

Area of Science:

Cognitive Psychology
Behavioral Economics
Animal Behavior

Background:

The ephemeral reward task presents a choice between two options with identical rewards.
Optimal strategy involves choosing option B first to maximize cumulative rewards, as option A remains available.
Non-human species show varied success, with some animals mastering the task while primates, rats, and pigeons struggle.

Purpose of the Study:

To investigate human performance on an operant version of the ephemeral reward task.
To determine the effect of a brief delay between choice and reward on optimal decision-making.
To explore the relationship between task performance and impulsivity measures in humans.

Main Methods:

Human subjects were trained on an operant ephemeral reward task.
The study included conditions with and without a brief delay between choice and reward.
Performance was assessed and correlated with impulsivity measures (Balloon Analog Risk Task, Abbreviated Impulsivity Survey).

Main Results:

A significant portion of human subjects failed to learn the optimal strategy, irrespective of the delay.
Task performance did not correlate with standard measures of impulsivity.
Optimal choice acquisition was not facilitated by introducing a delay between the choice and reward.

Conclusions:

The ephemeral reward task's difficulty for humans stems from its ambiguous reinforcement structure ('good' vs. 'better' choices).
Impulsivity does not appear to be the primary factor limiting optimal performance in humans on this task.
The lack of a clear 'incorrect' response complicates learning and discrimination of superior strategies.