Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T16:31:50.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reinforcement is dead; long live reinforcement theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2010

James E. Mazur
James E. Mazur
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology and Social Relations, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass 02138
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , March 1978 , pp. 68
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baum, W. M., and Rachlin, H. C.Choice as time allocation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 12:861–74.1969.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bolles, R. C.Species-specific defense reactions and avoidance learning. Psychological Review. 77:32–48.1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, I. L.The reinforcement value of schedule-induced drinking. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 23:37–44.1975.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Villiers, P. A. Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. In: Honig, W. K. and Staddon, J. E. R. (eds.), Handbook of Operant Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1977.Google Scholar
de Villiers, P. A. and Hermstein, R. J.Toward a law of response strength. Psychological Bulletin. 83:1131–53.1976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hermstein, R. J.On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 13:243–66.1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Killeen, P.The matching law. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 17:489–95.1972.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mazur, J. E.The matching law and quantifications related to Premack's principle. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes. 1:374–86.1975.Google Scholar
Quantitative studies of reinforcement relativity. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 27:137–49.1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, H. L.Matching-based hedonic scaling in the pigeon. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 26:335–47.1976.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Navarick, D. J., and Fantino, E.Self-control and general models of choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes. 2:75–87.1976.Google Scholar
Premack, D. Reinforcement theory. In: Levine, D. (ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln, Neb., University of Nebraska Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Catching up with common sense or two sides of a generalization: Reinforcement and punishment. In: Glaser, R. (ed.), The Nature of Reinforcement. New York, Academic Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Rachlin, H.On the tautology of the matching law. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 15:249–51. 1971.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skinner, B. F.Beyond Freedom and Dignity. New York, Vintage Books, 1971.Google Scholar