Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
P. Brown, H. Jenkins (1968)
Auto-shaping of the pigeon's key-peck.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 11 1
J. Myer, J. Hull (1974)
Autoshaping and instrumental learning in the rat.Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 86
P. Dunham (1968)
Contrasted conditions of reinforcement. A selective critique.Psychological bulletin, 69 5
Dennis Russo, Robert Koegei, O. Lovaas (1978)
A comparison of human and automated instruction of autistic childrenJournal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 6
K. Colby (1973)
The rationale for computer-based treatment of language difficulties in nonspeaking autistic childrenJournal of autism and childhood schizophrenia, 3
B. Schwartz, E. Gamzu (1977)
Pavlovian Control Of Operant Behavior: An Analysis Of Autoshaping And Its Implications For Operant Conditioning
S. Brandon, M. Bitterman (1979)
Analysis of autoshaping in goldfishAnimal Learning & Behavior, 7
M. Zeiler (1972)
Superstitious behavior in children: an experimental analysis.Advances in child development and behavior, 7
David Williams, H. Williams (1969)
Auto-maintenance in the pigeon: sustained pecking despite contingent non-reinforcement.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 12 4
Gilbert Atnip (1977)
Stimulus- and response-reinforcer contingencies in autoshaping, operant, classical, and omission training procedures in rats.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 28 1
L. Schreibman (1975)
Effects of within-stimulus and extra-stimulus prompting on discrimination learning in autistic children.Journal of applied behavior analysis, 8 1
Paul Lewis, M. Stoyak (1979)
Signal-controlled responding.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior, 31 1
E. Hearst, H. Jenkins (1974)
Sign-tracking : the stimulus-reinforcer relation and directed action
Three experimentally naive abnormal children were exposed to a terminal operant contingency, i.e., reinforcement was delivered only if the children pressed a panel during intervals when it was lighted. Despite the absence of both successive approximation and manual shaping, it was found that each child began to respond discriminatively within a small number of trials. These data replicated previous animal studies concerned with the phenomena of autoshaping and signal-controlled responding. It was also found, however, that one type of autoshaping, the classical conditioning procedure, had a powerful suppressive effect on discriminative responding. An experimental analysis that consisted of a combination of intrasubject reversal and multiple baseline designs established the internal validity of the findings. The finding of rapid acquisiton of signalcontrolled responding obtained with the initial procedure is suggested to have practical significance. The disruptive effects of the classical form of autoshaping are discussed in terms of negative behavioral contrast.
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology – Springer Journals
Published: Dec 16, 2004
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.