The effects of intermittent schedules of reinforcement for pausing were evaluated in two experiments. In Experiment 1, across a series of conditions, a variable‐interval (VI) baseline schedule, in which pigeons' key pecks produced food, alternated with conditions in which food was delivered according to a concurrent VI (for key pecking) tandem variable‐time differential‐reinforcement‐of‐other‐behavior (DRO) 5‐s schedule. Time spent pausing within a session was proportional to the reinforcement rates associated with the tandem schedule. To examine the control of pausing by antecedent events, Experiment 2 arranged a multiple schedule in which pecking and pausing in either component were maintained according to concurrent schedules like those used in the first experiment. The availability of reinforcement for pausing was signaled in one component while signals uncorrelated with reinforcement were presented in the other. Signaled reinforcement for pausing, relative to the presentation of uncorrelated signals, decreased time spent pausing, a finding consistent with existing research on the effects of signaled VI reinforcement for key pecking in pigeons. The results of the two experiments show that pausing functions as an operant in much the same way that discrete responses, like key pecks, do, and that pausing and other operants are similarly affected by both antecedent and consequent events.