ABA Fundamentals

Contingency tracking during unsignaled delayed reinforcement.

Keely et al. (2007) · Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 2007
★ The Verdict

Rats track cause-and-effect even when the payoff is late and silent, so past delayed reinforcement may explain current "non-functional" responses.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who see persistent responses with no obvious reinforcer.
✗ Skip if Clinicians working only with immediate, signaled rewards.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Your client may keep doing a response that looks useless. Before you call it "non-functional," check if it once started a delayed reinforcer. History matters.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Probe if the puzzling response ever started a delayed reinforcer; run a brief reversal to test.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
single case other
Population
not specified
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

Three experiments were conducted with rats in which responses on one lever (labeled the functional lever) produced reinforcers after an unsignaled delay period that reset with each response during the delay. Responses on a second, nonfunctional, lever did not initiate delays, but, in the first and third experiments, such responses during the last 10 s of a delay did postpone food delivery another 10 s. In the first experiment, the location of the two levers was reversed several times. Responding generally was higher on the functional lever, though the magnitude of the difference diminished with successive reversals. In the second experiment, once a delay was initiated by a response on the functional lever, in different conditions responses on the nonfunctional lever either had no effect or postponed food delivery by 30 s. The latter contingency typically lowered response rates on the nonfunctional lever. In the first two experiments, both the functional and nonfunctional levers were identical except for their location; in the third experiment, initially, a vertically mounted, pole-push lever defined the functional response and a horizontally mounted lever defined the nonfunctional response. Higher response rates occurred on the functional lever. These results taken together suggest that responding generally tracked the response-reinforcer contingency. The results further show how nonfunctional-operanda responses are controlled by a prior history of direct reinforcement of such responses, by the temporal delay between such responses and food delivery, and as simple generalization between the two operanda.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2007 · doi:10.1901/jeab.2007.06-05