{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028901734104046242, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008670520231213872, 'mean_word_length': 4.918803418803419, '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}}
Delayed reinforcement and delayed choice in symbolic matching to sample: Effects on stimulus discriminability.

Six pigeons were trained to peck a red side key when the brighter of two white lights (S(1)) had been presented on the center key, and to peck a green side key when the dimmer of two white lights (S(2)) had been presented on the center key. Equal frequencies of reinforcers were provided for the two types of correct choice. Incorrect choices, red side-key pecks following S(2) presentations and green side-key pecks following S(1) presentations, resulted in blackout. With 0-s delay between choice and reinforcement, the delay between sample presentation and choice was varied from 0 to 20 s. Then, with 0-s delay between sample presentation and choice, the delay between choice and reinforcement was varied from 0 to 20 s. Both types of delay resulted in decreased discriminability (defined in terms of a signal-detection analysis) of the center-key stimuli, but delayed choice had more effect on discriminability than did delayed reinforcement. These data are consistent with the view that the two kinds of delay operate differently. The effect of a sample-choice delay may result from a degradation of the conditional discriminative stimuli during the delay; the effect of a choice-reinforcer delay may result from a decrement in control by differential reinforcement.