Resistance to change and preference for variable versus fixed response sequences.
Reinforcing varied response patterns creates stronger, preferred behavior that resists disruption better than locked, repetitive patterns.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Arantes et al. (2012) worked with pigeons in a lab. The birds had to peck four times on two keys in a set order.
Some birds had to repeat the same pattern every time (fixed). Others could change the pattern (variable). Both groups earned food at the same rate.
The team then added free food while the birds worked. They watched which pattern broke first.
What they found
The variable sequences held up longer against the free-food lure. The fixed patterns fell apart faster.
When the birds could choose, they picked the variable task even though both paid the same. Variable behavior showed stronger behavioral momentum.
How this fits with other research
Schwartz (1982) saw the opposite: pigeons stuck to rigid patterns even when the rule rewarded novelty. The difference is in the rule. B required a brand-new sequence every time, which may have punished small changes. Joana allowed any variation, making the task easier.
Cox et al. (2015) later showed that momentum needs several stable sessions to build. Joana’s birds had that steady history, so their variable patterns grew tough.
Schwartz (1980) proved that plain reinforcement can create stereotyped sequences. Joana adds that we can flip that outcome by explicitly reinforcing variation.
Why it matters
If you want a learner to stay persistent, build in response variety instead of drilling one rigid form. Ask for different ways to touch, say, or write the answer while keeping reinforcement steady. The skill becomes harder to disrupt and the learner likes it more.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →During drills, praise the child for using different word orders, hand paths, or answers that still meet the goal.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
In Experiment 1, 4 pigeons were trained on a multiple chain schedule in which the initial link was a variable-interval (VI) 20-s schedule signalled by a red or green center key, and terminal links required four responses made to the left (L) and/or right (R) keys. In the REPEAT component, signalled by red keylights, only LRLR terminal-link response sequences were reinforced, while in the VARY component, signalled by green keylights, terminal-link response sequences were reinforced if they satisfied a variability criterion. The reinforcer rate for both components was equated by adjusting the reinforcer probability for correct REPEAT sequences across sessions. Results showed that initial- and terminal-link responding in the VARY component was generally more resistant to prefeeding, extinction, and response-independent food than responding in the REPEAT component. In Experiment 2, the REPEAT and VARY contingencies were arranged as terminal links of a concurrent chain and the relative reinforcer rate was manipulated across conditions. For all pigeons, initial-link response allocation was biased toward the alternative associated with the VARY terminal link. These results replicate previous reports that operant variation is more resistant to change than operant repetition (Doughty & Lattal, 2001), and show that variation is preferred to repetition with reinforcer-related variables controlled. Behavioral momentum theory (Nevin & Grace, 2000) predicts the covariation of preference and resistance to change in Experiments 1 and 2, but does not explain why these aspects of behavior should depend on contingencies that require repetition or variation.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 2012 · doi:10.1901/jeab.2012.98-1