Response persistence under ratio and interval reinforcement schedules.
Interval schedules build tougher, longer-lasting behavior than ratio schedules.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Bennett et al. (1998) ran two animal tests. One group earned food on a progressive-ratio schedule. The other group earned the same food on a yoked-interval schedule. Both groups faced extinction after training. The team tracked how long each animal kept pressing the lever once food stopped.
The goal was to see which schedule built stronger, longer-lasting behavior.
What they found
Behavior maintained by interval schedules lasted longer during extinction. Ratio-trained animals quit sooner. The pattern held across both experiments. Interval reinforcement created more persistent responding.
How this fits with other research
Matson et al. (1994) looked at progressive-ratio history effects. They found that past schedules only changed the first few minutes on a new ratio. Bennett et al. (1998) zoomed out and showed that the schedule type itself, not just history, shapes long-term staying power.
LeBlanc et al. (2003) also tested resistance to change. They showed that richer reinforcement makes behavior tougher to disrupt. Bennett et al. (1998) add that interval schedules, even at equal reinforcement density, give extra staying power.
Bigelow (1971) showed that fixed-ratio schedules can keep spaced responding steady. That sounds like ratio behavior is durable, but Bennett et al. (1998) show it collapses faster once reinforcement stops. The two findings fit: ratio schedules control response spacing, yet they do not protect against extinction.
Why it matters
When you shape a new skill, think about the schedule you leave behind. If you want the skill to stick through thin reinforcement times, lean on interval-like delivery. For example, after a child masters tacting colors, mix unprompted trials across time instead of requiring a fixed number before the next reinforcer. This small switch may slow extinction during natural dips in attention or staff praise.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Replace a fixed-ratio maintenance schedule with time-based reinforcement for one skill and track if the learner keeps responding during brief extinction probes.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
In Experiment 1, rats were exposed to progressive‐ratio schedules of food reinforcement while other rats were exposed simultaneously to yoked‐interval schedules that arranged equivalent interreinforcer intervals but required only a single response at the end of the interval for food delivery. In Experiment 2, a within‐subject yoked‐control procedure was employed in which pigeons were exposed to alternating sessions (one per day) of progressive‐ratio schedules and yoked‐interval schedules as described above. In both experiments, responding under the yoked‐interval schedule persisted beyond the point at which responding under the progressive‐ratio schedule had ceased. The progressive‐ratio schedules controlled break‐and‐run distributions, and the yoked‐interval schedules controlled more even distributions of responses in time. Response rates decreased and postreinforcement pauses increased over time within individual sessions under both schedules. The results suggest that responding maintained by interval schedules is more persistent than that maintained by ratio schedules. The limitations and implications of this conclusion are discussed in the context of other investigations of response strength and behavioral momentum.
Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 1998 · doi:10.1901/jeab.1998.70-165