Dynamic equilibrium on a cyclic-interval schedule with a ramp.

Five adult humans sat at a computer key.

Every press could pay money, but the chance rose in a steady ramp inside short cycles.

The team watched if finger speed would climb along with the rising payoff odds.

Four people pressed faster in perfect step with the climbing rate.

One person showed the same climb, only a little late.

The neat match says humans act like simple amplifiers: more payoff odds per minute equals more taps per minute.

Lattal (1974) first drew the power curve for pigeons on multiple schedules; J et al. now show the same math works when the rate keeps moving inside a cycle.

Wilkinson et al. (1998) found people care most about overall density, not tiny delays. The ramp result backs that view—response rate rode the density wave, not the single-reinforcer timing.

Schmitt (2000) paid adults in a game and saw effort rise with payoff share. The ramp paper tightens the rule: even when the climb is smooth and sure, the line stays straight.

If you want steady skill growth, shape denser reinforcement bit by bit. The learner’s output will rise right with it, no extra instructions needed. Try fading token payoff, faster praise, or shorter check-ins in a smooth ramp and watch the behavior follow.