Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,060

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The "supersitition" experiment: A reexamination of its implications for the principles of adaptive behavior.

Staddon, J. E., Simmelhag, Virginia L.·1971·Psychological Review

Abstract

Replication and extension of Skinner's superstition experiment showed the development of two kinds of behavior at asymptote: interim activities (related to adjunctive behavior) occurred just after food delivery; the terminal response (a discriminated operant) occurred toward the end of the interval and continued until food delivery. These data suggest a view of operant conditioning (the terminal response) in terms of two sets of principles: principles of behavioral variation that describe the origins of behavior appropriate to a situation, in advance of reinforcement; and principles of reinforcement that describe the selective elimination of behavior so produced. This approach was supported by (a) an account of the parallels between the Law of Effect and evolution by means of natural selection, (fc) its ability to shed light on persistent problems in (e.g., continuity vs. noncontinuity, variability associated with extinction, the relationship between classical and instrumental conditioning, the controversy between behaviorist and cognitive approaches to learning), and (c) its ability to deal with a number of recent anomalies in the literature (instinctive drift, auto-shaping, and auto-maintenance). The interim activities were interpreted in terms of interactions among motivational systems, and this view was supported by a review of the literature on adjunctive behavior and by comparison with similar phenomena in ethology (displacement, redirection, and vacuum activities). The proposed theoretical scheme represents a shift away from hypothetical laws of learning toward an interpretation of behavioral change in terms of interaction and competition among tendencies to action according to principles evolved in phylogeny.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/h0030305

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 1,060

Metadata

Authors
Staddon, J. E., & Simmelhag, V. L.
Venue
Psychological Review
Published
1971-01
Volume
78
Issue
1
Pages
3-43
ISSN
  • 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1471
OpenAlex
W2162733293
Cited by
1,060
References
6
FWCI
55.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The "supersitition" experiment: A reexamination of its implications for the principles of adaptive behavior. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/h0030305
The paper
Staddon, J. E., & Simmelhag, V. L. (1971). The "supersitition" experiment: A reexamination of its implications for the principles of adaptive behavior. Psychological Review. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030305

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.