Sistema Regional de Información
en línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina,
el Caribe, España y Portugal

Although the cumulative record and cumulative recorder have become closely identified with B.F. Skinner and the experimental analysis of behavior, they actually predate both. The purpose of this article is to describe some early examples of cumulative records in psychology and physiology, as well as the techniques used to generate them. Among the work of Walther Poppelreuter, Heinrich von Recklinghausen, Fletcher Dresslar, Colin Stewart, James Slonaker, and others are early examples of “telescoping” to save space on the printed page, the automatic resetting of the pen at the top of the page, and other anticipations of Skinner’s own development of the technique. In most early instances, the cumulative recording was not used to display discrete operant responses such as lever presses, but to depict wheel running and respiration over extended periods. The historical approach here is illustrative rather than comprehensive, with the hope that these examples will serve as a starting point for those who might investigate further. 

Entre fases sucesivas se expuso a ratas a la entrega de agua no contingente, contingente y de acuerdo con un procedimiento de discriminación condicional de dos opciones, en ese orden. En las tres fases experimentales se calculó un mismo índice generalizado de ajuste a las contingencias vigentes. En contraste con reportes anteriores, el índice de ajuste mostró una función bitónica ascendente-descendente en lugar de una función monotónica descendente entre las condiciones de entrega de agua. Los resultados son atribuibles a la sustitución de las palancas por receptáculos de comida como dispositivos de respuesta para la producción del agua. Se discute la idea de que las respuestas no manipulativas previenen el desligamiento funcional que corresponde a la función suplementaria descrita por Ribes y López (1985).  

B.F. Skinner developed the operant laboratory using electromechanical technology available in the 1930s. Since then, electronics and digital computers have changed the way in which events are recorded, and experiments programed and controlled. However, the essential features of the operant preparation (a set of instruments, concepts, and procedures seamlessly integrated to reliably render samples of operant behavior) have remained for the most part intact. Years of accumulated knowledge may be necessary to understand the extent of a model’s capacity and limitations. In the case of the operant preparation, a number of important limitations to its original accepted validity have appeared over time, derived from new data and more inclusive theoretical frameworks. The aim of this paper is to examine the significance of the operant assay, and to consider potential extensions to incorporate dimensions of behavior made possible by new and emerging theories and technologies.

Instrumentation in behavior analysis began with Skinner, who sought the kind of precision and objectivity for the study of learning that, by his time, had become well-established in experimental psychology generally. The articles in this issue could be described as “variations on a theme of Skinner” in that they describe instrumentation that has its origin in the creative apparatus that Skinner pioneered in the early 1930s and elaborated on by generations of other researchers following in the Skinnerian tradition. It is the case, however, that behavior-analytic instrumentation of this sort has had an impact on the practice of not only behavior-analytic science, but many others areas of contemporary psychology and beyond.

In this review, Homo sapiens is considered as a scientific instrument functioning to arrange contingencies of reinforcement and punishment, and to measure the behavioral effects of such arrangements. The human’s performance as an instrument can be understood, as can other behavior, as a function of both its behavioral history and the impingement of current circumstances. Knowing these variables allows the arrangement of environments that can improve the performance of the human instrument. Of particular importance is the human’s development other types of instruments that complement or supplement their instrumental functions in behavior-analytic research and application. The proficiency with which human instruments use these technology-derived instruments is determined by the user-friendliness of the instrument, the human’s training with such instruments, and the human’s fluency with the principles from which the instrument was developed.

Esta sección tiene la función de diseminar las noticias y los comentarios relevantes para la Sociedad Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta. En este número se incluye un apartado titulado Hace 40 años en la RMAC…, el cual cuenta con el propósito de recordar o familiarizar a los lectores de la RMAC con el contenido que se publicaba durante los orígenes de la misma.

Se compararon los efectos de implementar una demora de reforzamiento sobre las respuestas mantenidas con reforzadores constantes y con reforzadores cualitativamente variados. Se expuso a tres ratas privadas de comida y de agua a un programa múltiple de reforzamiento de intervalo variable (IV) 45 s IV45 s IV45 s.Durante los primeros dos componentes se entregaron reforzadores constantes (agua o comida respectivamente) y durante el tercer componente se emplearon reforzadores variados (agua y comida alternadamente).No se observaron diferencias en las tasas de respuesta a través de los componentes. Posteriormente se introdujo una demora de reforzamiento de 3 s, no señalada y no reiniciable en cada uno de los componentes. Se encontró que la tasa de respuesta disminuyó diferencialmente para cada uno de los componentes, resultando en una mayor disminución en el componente de agua, seguido de reforzamiento variado y del componente de comida, respectivamente.Los resultados son consistentes con algunos estudios en los cuales se mostró que el reforzamiento variado inmediato no necesariamente resulta en tasas de respuestas más altas relativo al reforzamiento constante inmediato. Adicionalmente, los datos sugieren que la calidad de los reforzadores modula el efecto disruptivo de la demora de reforzamiento sobre la tasa de respuesta. 

The experiment examined effects of instructions on human schedule performance when providers of the instructions were persons other than the experimenter. Pressing a key by one member of each pair of eight undergraduates produced points on a multiple fixed-interval (FI) FI schedule.Another member of the pair was exposed to a multiple fixed-ratio (FR) differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedule. After every session, verbal descriptions of how to increase points written by another member of the pair were presented.The final response rates under the multiple FI FI schedule were indistinguishable between the two components in each of four participants although they each received verbal descriptions indicating that the way to increase points with the key was to respond rapidly in one component and to respond slowly in another. Such weak effects of instructions given from persons other than the experimenter were contrasted with stronger effects of instructions given by the experimenter, that is, the final response rates were higher with the instruction to respond rapidly than with the instruction to respond slowly for three of the four participants.This differential effect across the instruction providers was not found in each of four participants who were exposed to the multiple FR DRL schedule.

The present project applied area under the curve (AUC), a measure used to describe delay discounting functions (e.g., Myerson, Green & Warasuwitharana, 2001) to the analysis of data from rats and pigeons obtained during the acquisition phase (i.e., first 10 sessions) in a peak-interval procedure (PIP). The variation of the AUC according to bin size was examined. Additionally, the AUC was correlated with other corresponding measures of temporal control: quarter lives and index of curvatures. In general, the AUC adequately reflected the changes in behavior during acquisition of a response pattern. Some limitations of these quantitative indices of temporal control are discussed. The application of AUC to quantify response patterns during acquisition during peak trials of a PIP can complement other types of data analysis conducted when using this procedure.