A response-spacing effect: an absence of responding during response-feedback stimuli.
Extended feedback stimuli can themselves suppress responding and pace behavior—check stimulus duration when designing reinforcement schedules.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Hake et al. (1969) asked a simple question: what happens if we make the feedback light stay on longer after each response?
They used single-case lab methods with non-human subjects. Each lever press turned on a light. The team stretched how long that light glowed.
They watched how duration changed the pattern and amount of future pressing.
What they found
Long feedback lights almost stopped the behavior. Response rate dropped close to zero.
The few responses that did occur came out in a slow, steady rhythm. The extended stimulus acted like a mini-timeout, pacing the animal’s own responding.
How this fits with other research
Byrd (1972) later tested DRL schedules that reward spaced responses. Both papers show timing can control behavior, but D used reinforcement while F used stimulus duration.
Cicerone (1976) extended the idea. That study proved colored lights can steer only the long pauses under DRL, leaving short bursts untouched. Together the trio shows: spacing can be driven by feedback length, by reinforcement, or by stimulus cues.
Horner (1971) and WEINER (1964) show the flip side. They suppressed behavior with DRO or response cost. F achieved the same silence just by leaving the light on. The message: many roads lead to response reduction; stimulus duration is one easy knob to turn.
Why it matters
Check your feedback stimuli before you blame the schedule. A long praise message, flashing icon, or lengthy error box can accidentally pause learning. Try trimming feedback to the shortest clear interval, then watch if response flow improves. This quick audit costs nothing and can save sessions of slow performance.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Time your feedback cues today—if any stay on longer than one second, cut them to half a second and count responses for change.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
In most studies of operant reinforcement a response-feedback stimulus is used which is so brief that the nature of the responding during it is virtually undetectable. The present study investigated the nature of this responding by lengthening an initially brief feedback stimulus. The key-pecking responses of pigeons were maintained by a variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement. Each response produced a brief stimulus light in addition to the usual auditory response feedback. When the duration of the feedback stimulus light was gradually increased, it was found to control a nearly zero rate of responding. The result was a paced, metronomic-like performance in which the pigeon made a single response, paused until the stimulus terminated, and then responded again. As a result, the overall response rate was greatly reduced; the mean interresponse time approximated the stimulus duration. A plausible interpretation is that brief feedback stimuli acquire control over responding because they coincide with few responses and few reinforcers. These findings show that in addition to their known functions as conditioned-reinforcing stimuli and discriminative stimuli, response-feedback stimuli also exert direct stimulus control: responding is reduced during the feedback stimulus itself.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1969 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1969.12-17