Abstract Following lever-press training on variable-interval 30-s schedules, rats were exposed to three types of schedules designed to eliminate lever pressing. The first two were variations on what is called a differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (DRO, “zero rate”, or [target response] omission schedule) schedule. Under both variations, reinforcers were scheduled to occur in different conditions after either fixed or variable inter-reinforcer intervals (IRIs). Under one variation each lever press reset the time interval (i.e., “resetting DRO”) and under the other a reinforcer delivery scheduled at the end of an IRI was cancelled by the first response during the IRI (i.e., “cycle DRO”). In another condition reinforcers were delivered independently of responding after fixed or variable time periods. Each of the DRO procedures reduced response rates quickly and to near zero across ten sessions. The time schedules also reduced responding, albeit at a slower rate. The results extend the analogy of omission training to freeoperant avoidance to shock-deletion avoidance schedules.

中文翻译：

---

DRO 类型是否重要？：循环与重置意外事件以消除响应

摘要 在可变间隔 30 秒计划的杠杆按压训练后，大鼠接受了旨在消除杠杆按压的三种类型的计划。前两个是所谓的差异强化其他行为（DRO、“零率”或 [目标响应] 遗漏计划）计划的变体。在这两种变体下，强化物被安排在固定或可变的强化间间隔（IRI）之后在不同的条件下发生。在一个变体中，每次杠杆按压都会重置时间间隔（即“重置 DRO”），而在另一个变体中，在 IRI 结束时安排的强化剂输送被 IRI 期间的第一次响应取消（即“循环 DRO”）。在另一种情况下，强化剂在固定或可变的时间段后独立于反应而传递。每个 DRO 程序都迅速降低了响应率，并在十个会话中接近于零。时间表也减少了响应，尽管速度较慢。结果将疏忽训练的类比扩展到自由操作避免到电击-删除避免计划。