Dynamic Interactions between Induction and Reinforcement in the Organization of Behavior

Abstract

Behavior is dynamic because it results from the interactions between organisms and their environment. Reinforcement is the primary mechanism for explaining behavior, and it has evolved in various ways, allowing for the explanation of different aspects of behavior acquisition and maintenance. The adequacy of reinforcement in explaining behavior acquisition has mostly been tested on target behaviors. However, a broader understanding of behavior requires accounting not only for target behaviors but for all behaviors in a given situation. This article presents several experiments showcasing schedule-induced behaviors to analyze the variables that determine which behaviors are acquired and how they are organized. First, the effects of both physical and contingency-based constraints on the organization of behavior are examined. Second, the role of competition and collaboration between behaviors in determining their distribution is discussed. Third, a dual effect of reinforcers on behavioral patterns is proposed. It is concluded that behaviors interact with one another and with environmental stimuli, and behavioral patterns are continuously induced, updated, and reinforced. Data in this article highlight the need to focus on the moment-to-moment updating of behavioral patterns to fully understand behavioral dynamics.

Keywords: Behavior organization; Behavioral dynamics; Reinforcement; Schedule-induced behaviors.

Fig. 1

Distribution of Licking in 3-s Bins. Note. Upper panel is the last session of Phase 1, lower panel is the last session of Phase 2. Adapted from Álvarez et al. (2011)

Fig. 2

Total Licks per Session for the Experimental (Black Circles) and Control (White Circles) Groups. Note. Adapted from Álvarez et al. (2016)

Fig. 3

Licking Rate (Circles, Left y-axis) and Reinforcement Rate (Discontinued Line, Right y-axis) throughout the 15 Experimental Sessions. Note. Vertical bars are the SEM

Fig. 4

Distribution of Licking (Black Triangles) and Magazine-Entering (White Triangles) in 1-s Bins. Note. Vertical bars are the SEM

Fig. 5

Licking Rate (Upper Panel) and Postreinforcement Pause (Lower Panel) throughout the Experiment in 60-Trial Blocks. Note. Vertical bars are the SEM

Fig. 6

Mean Response Rate in the Last Three Sessions of Each FT Schedule. Note. Left panel depicts licking rate and right panel depicts magazine-entering rate. Adapted from Martínez-Herrada et al. (2025)

Fig. 7

Note. A: Mean licking rate for the no-lever (experimental, black symbols) and lever (control, white symbols) groups during the last session of training, and the two test sessions. B: intra-session changes in the mean licking rate in intervals 2 to 8, for the experimental group. Black symbols represent the last session of training and white symbols the first test session. Lines represent the best linear fit for each session. Figures 2 (panel A) and 4 (panel B), reprinted with permission from Ardoy and Pellón (2004)

Fig. 8

Note. Panel A: distribution of responses during fixed interval trials. Panel B: distribution of responses during peak interval trials. Panel C: Response rate in the post-FI and post-PI trials. White circles represent lever-presses and black triangles represent licks. Vertical bars are the SEM

Fig. 9

Distribution of Licks (Upper Panel) and Magazine-Entries (Lower Panel) throughout the Duration of the Stimulus. Note. Notice stimuli had different durations, so the curve is cut when the stimulus ended