J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Sep;26(2):135-41. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-135.
During Phase I, human subjects pressed a button for monetary reinforcement in five variable-interval schedules, each of which specified a different frequency of reinforcement. The rate of responding was an increasing, negatively accelerated function of reinforcement frequency; the data conformed closely to Herrnstein's equation. During Phase II, the same five schedules were in operation, but in addition a concurrent variable-interval schedule (B) was introduced, responses on which were always reinforced at the same frequency. Response rate in component A increased while the response rate in B decreased, as a function of the reinforcement frequency in component A. Relative response rates in the two component schedules matched the relative frequencies of reinforcement. Comparing the absolute response rates in component A during Phase I and Phase II it was found that introduction of the concurrent schedule did not affect the value of the theoretical maximum response rate, but did increase the value of the reinforcement frequency needed to obtain any particular submaximal response rate.
在第一阶段,人类受测者按下按钮以获得金钱强化,强化的频率由五个不同的时距程序决定。反应率是强化频率的一个递增的、负加速的函数;数据非常符合 Herrnstein 的方程。在第二阶段,相同的五个程序同时运行,但同时引入了一个并行的时距程序(B),程序 B 的反应总是以相同的频率得到强化。随着 A 程序强化频率的增加,A 程序的反应率增加,而 B 程序的反应率下降。两个程序的相对反应率与强化的相对频率相匹配。比较第一阶段和第二阶段 A 程序的绝对反应率,发现引入并行程序并不影响理论最大反应率的值,但确实增加了获得任何特定次最大反应率所需的强化频率的值。