ABA Fundamentals

Factors influencing responding under multiple schedules of conditioned and unconditioned reinforcement.

Cohen et al. (1976) · Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 1976
★ The Verdict

Conditioned reinforcers only work after clear food pairing and smart timing.

✓ Read this if BCBAs building token boards or praise systems for any client.
✗ Skip if Practitioners who use only edible reinforcers and never fade them.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Kodera et al. (1976) worked with pigeons under multiple schedules.

They asked: what keeps a brief light working like food?

The team first paired the light with grain. Then they removed grain in some parts and changed timing in others.

02

What they found

The light kept the birds pecking only if it had first been paired with food.

When food stopped, the light lost power unless it still appeared near food in time.

Short flashes worked only at the right moment; bad timing killed the effect.

03

How this fits with other research

Kelleher (1966) showed the basic effect: a half-second light can stand in for food. L et al. broke that effect into parts.

Kohlenberg (1973) later found that a stimulus must stay on for the whole component or observing stops. Together the two papers say: pair the stimulus with food and keep it long enough.

Au-Yeung et al. (2015) flipped the question to humans. Tokens raised resistance to extinction more than food, but less after pre-feeding. The animal rule — conditioned reinforcers need care — holds across species.

04

Why it matters

Your praise, points, or lights will fail if the client never tasted the real deal. First deliver the primary reinforcer with the signal. Then keep the signal near in time and of usable length. Check these two pieces before you drop food or toys from the plan.

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

Before session, test each conditioned reinforcer: deliver it with a bite of food three times, then see if the client still works when you withhold the bite.

02At a glance

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

03Original abstract

Two experiments examined pigeons' responses under multiple schedules of conditioned and unconditioned reinforcement. In one component, responses produced food according to a fixed-interval schedule; in a second component, responses produced brief stimuli according to a fixed-ratio schedule. When brief-stimulus presentations were paired with food in the first component, rates in the second component were usually higher than 10 responses per minute. When pairing in the first component was eliminated, responding continued to be maintained in the second component. Elimination of food presentation from the first component substantially decreased responding in the second component, even though the brief stimulus had not been paired with food. Experiment II demonstrated that response rate was affected by the duration of both the second component and the brief stimulus. The results suggest that three conditions are important in maintaining responding with brief-stimulus presentations: (1) pairing the brief stimulus, at least initially, with food, (2) maintaining unconditioned reinforcement in one component, and (3) employing optimal brief-stimulus and component durations.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1976 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1976.26-395