{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01736745886654479, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007312614259597806, 'mean_word_length': 4.983606557377049, '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}}
The Effect of Variations in Reinforcement Probability on Preference in an Elapsed‐Time Procedure

Given a choice between two responses, both producing reinforcement after a fixed temporal interval, most subjects would certainly prefer the response alternative with the higher probability of reinforcement. It is not clear, however, whether such preferences are best understood as changes in response bias or, rather, as changes in estimated time to reinforcement. This question was explored by modifying a procedure in which subjects chose between a long and short interval after varying portions of the long interval had elapsed.' In the present study the probability of reinforcement that terminated the short interval was varied across conditions. Suppose that reinforcement was programmed after 60 sec for response A and after 10 sec for response B. If a choice between A and B were offered at the start of both intervals, subjects should prefer B. If B were offered after 50 sec had elapsed (such that 10 sec remained for A and B), then either response should be chosen equally often. If B