ABA Fundamentals

Observing responses maintained by conditional discriminative stimuli.

Ohta (1987) · Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior 1987
★ The Verdict

Stimuli that reliably signal upcoming rewards become conditioned reinforcers that keep learners looking.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who use conditioned reinforcers or conditional-discrimination tasks in clinics or classrooms.
✗ Skip if Practitioners working only with unconditional reinforcers like food and praise.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Pigeons pecked two keys in a conditional-discrimination task.

One key showed a color cue. The cue either predicted food or predicted no food.

The birds could peck a separate ‘observing’ key to see the color cue early.

Researchers counted how often the birds peeked at the cue.

02

What they found

Pigeons peeked more when the color told them food was coming.

The color itself became a tiny reward — a conditioned reinforcer.

Even though the color gave no extra food, it kept the observing response alive.

03

How this fits with other research

Hamilton et al. (1978) first showed brief food-paired lights can reinforce key pecks. The 1987 study moves that idea to observing responses.

Meltzer (1983) found pigeons learned best when the unclear cue sat on the non-food key. Together the papers show cue location and cue meaning both guide learning.

Nevin et al. (2005) later built a math model saying reinforcement rate sets ‘attention’ strength. Their model explains why information-bearing cues keep birds looking — the same mechanism Ohta (1987) caught in action.

04

Why it matters

You can turn neutral stimuli into reinforcers just by letting them signal good news.

In therapy, let a picture, word, or sound announce ‘points coming’ and clients may work to see that cue.

Track how often clients look at or point to the cue — that observing response is your measure of conditioned reinforcement strength.

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

Pair a neutral card with high-rate praise for one client; next session count how often the client glances at or reaches for the card.

02At a glance

Intervention
other
Design
single case other
Population
not specified
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

In a conditional discrimination procedure, pigeons' observing responses were analyzed to examine whether two color stimuli (blue or red), conditionally related to whether each of two line stimuli (vertical or horizontal) accompanied reinforcement or nonreinforcement, functioned as conditioned reinforcers. If a variable-interval (VI) 10-s requirement was fulfilled, an observing response produced onset of a color stimulus. A little later, a line stimulus was presented independently of responding, added to the color stimulus to form a compound stimulus. If 55 s elapsed with a response not having occurred either through 55 s or after the variable-interval 10-s had timed out, one of the color-line compound stimuli was presented independently of responding. To control for sensory reinforcement effects and for earlier entrance to the later link, a simple discrimination procedure also was conducted in which reinforcement was not correlated with the color stimuli but with the line stimuli only. As in the conditional discrimination, the observing response also could produce earlier presentation of blue or red. The observing response occurred more frequently during the conditional discrimination than during the simple discrimination. The results were related to different theoretical accounts of conditioned reinforcement, particularly the information hypothesis.

Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1987 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1987.48-355