Behavioral contrast in fixed-interval components: effects of extinction-component duration.
Longer extinction parts in a schedule crank up response rates in the next reinforced part, most when that part is short.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team used a two-part schedule with pigeons. First part: a fixed-interval schedule where pecks paid off after a set time. Second part: extinction, no pay at all.
They kept the FI part short and steady. They only changed how long the extinction part lasted. Then they watched how fast the birds pecked right after each extinction block.
What they found
Longer extinction blocks made the birds peck faster when reinforcement returned. The boost was biggest when the FI part itself was short.
In plain words, more non-reinforcement now means more work later.
How this fits with other research
Ginsburg et al. (1971) ran a similar test years earlier and saw the same climb: longer extinction gives bigger contrast. de Rose (1986) adds the new twist that short FI values make the climb even steeper.
McSweeney et al. (1993) later pinned down a sweet spot around 30–60 s of extinction for peak contrast. The three papers line up like steps on a ladder, each adding a timing rule.
Thomas et al. (1974) looks like a clash at first glance. They saw zero contrast when they kept reinforcement rate equal across parts. Their setup shows contrast needs unequal pay, not just extinction. The studies don’t fight; they simply map different levers.
Peterson (1968) stretched the idea to people with intellectual disabilities and still found the extinction boost. The effect crosses species, so your human clients can feel it too.
Why it matters
When you run DRA or multielement programs, watch the length of the no-reinforcement stretch. A long extinction span can spike rates when reinforcement comes back, especially if the next schedule is tight. Plan for the surge and you’ll avoid accidental bursts or problem behavior. If you need steady low rates, shorten the extinction component or lengthen the reinforced one.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Time your extinction phases; if you run a 30 s reinforced period, keep the prior extinction under 60 s to blunt a contrast spike.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Seven albino rats were exposed to a multiple schedule of reinforcement in which the two components (fixed interval and extinction) alternated such that a presentation of the extinction component followed each fixed-interval reinforcement. In baseline sessions, the duration of the extinction component was constant and always one-third of the fixed-interval value. Probe sessions contained a probe segment in which the duration of the extinction component was increased; the response rate in fixed-interval components during the probe segment was compared with the response rate in the segments preceding and following the probe. The effect of increasing the duration of the extinction component was studied under three values of fixed interval: 30 s, 120 s, and 18 s, in three successive conditions. Response rate within fixed intervals was a direct function of duration of the extinction component. Pausing at the beginning of the fixed interval decreased as extinction duration increased. These effects were larger and more consistent for the shorter fixed-interval values (18 s and 30 s). These results indicate a functional relation between relative component duration and responding. For the component providing more frequent reinforcement, this could be stated as an inverse relationship between relative component duration and response rate. This relation is similar to findings regarding the ratio of trial and intertrial duration in Pavlovian conditioning procedures, and suggests that behavioral contrast may be related to Pavlovian contingencies underlying the multiple schedule.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1986 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1986.45-175