{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01876675603217158, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00804289544235925, 'mean_word_length': 5.755656108597285, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On the relation between preference and resistance to change.

Nevin (1979) noted that preference in concurrent chains and resistance to change in multiple schedules were correlated, in that both measures were affected similarly by variations in parameters of reinforcement such as rate, immediacy, and magnitude. To investigate the relationship between preference and resistance to change directly, we used a within-session procedure that arranged concurrent chains in one half of the session and a multiple schedule in the other half. The same variable-interval schedules served as terminal links in concurrent chains and as the components of the multiple schedule, and were signaled by the same stimuli. After performances had stabilized, responding in the multiple schedule was disrupted by delivering response-independent reinforcement during the blackout periods between components. Both preference in concurrent chains and relative resistance to change of multiple-schedule responding were well described as power functions of relative reinforcement rate, as predicted by current quantitative models (Grace, 1994; Nevin, 1992b). In addition, unsystematic variation in preference and resistance to change was positively correlated, which suggests that preference and resistance to change are independent measures of a single construct. That construct could be described as the learning that occurs regarding the prevailing conditions of reinforcement in a distinctive stimulus situation.