Interresponse-time analysis of stimulus control in multiple schedules

Interresponse-time distributions were recorded in two components of multiple variable-interval schedules that were varied over several conditions. Values of the exponent for power functions relating ratios of interresponse times emitted per opportunity to ratios of reinforcers obtained in the two components varied with interresponse-time class interval. The exponent (sensitivity to reinforcement) afforded a measure of stimulus control exerted by the discriminative stimuli. Exponents were near zero for short interresponse times, consistent with previous conclusions that responses following short interresponse times are controlled by response-produced or proprioceptive stimuli. Values of exponents increased with longer interresponse times, indicating strong control by exteroceptive stimuli over responses following interresponse times of approximately one second or longer.     

An interresponse time analysis of variable-ratio punishment

An interresponse time analysis was used to study the effects of variable-ratio punishment schedules on the temporal pattern of reinforced responding. Twelve pigeons responded on a baseline variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement. A variable-ratio ten schedule of electric shock punishment was then introduced. The shock intensity was systematically increased to the highest intensity at which responding could be maintained. At this intensity, the mean variable-ratio value was increased and then decreased. Variable-ratio punishment resulted in an increased relative frequency of very short unreinforced interresponse times (response bursting). Increased response bursting accounted for instances of response rate facilitation. In addition, shock was followed by interresponse times of decreasing mean length over the first several responses after shock.     

Discrimination of response-reinforcer and response-stimulus contingencies in pigeons

For three pigeons (Experiment 1), the presentation of a red response key ended with a food presentation either following two responses separated by at least 10 seconds (a DRL contingency) or following a 10-second response-free period (a DRO contingency). For three other birds (Experiment 2), a brief stimulus presentation terminated the DRL and DRO contingencies. A white side key was presented next and ended with response-dependent food following one contingency and a timeout following the other. Since the contingency on the red key was unsignaled, differential responding on the white side key could indicate that the two response-reinforcer relations had been discriminated. In Experiment 1, the red-key duration and number of responses influenced white-key responding following the contingency that predicted the timeout. A response-initiated DRO was instated, and the influence of red-key duration and response number on white-key responding was diminished. In both experiments, the 10-second time criterion in both contingencies was varied from 0.34 second to 10 seconds. Even at short time intervals the DRO and DRL contingencies were readily discriminated. Pigeons tended to class the two contingencies according to a rule that did not involve simply stimulus duration, numbers of responses, or even the time between a response and its consequence.     

Studies of operant and reflexive key pecks in the pigeon

The duration of pigeons' key pecks was studied in three experiments. Experiment I revealed that key pecks early in exposure to continuous reinforcement were of short duration, as were key pecks observed on an omission procedure in which pecks prevented food delivery. Key pecks later in exposure to continuous reinforcement, and those that occurred on positive automaintenance procedures, were of long duration. In Experiment II, pigeons were exposed to fixed-interval and fixed-ratio reinforcement schedules, and durations were recorded separately for each quarter of each interval or ratio. On fixed interval, durations were shorter in the first quarter of each interval than in subsequent quarters; on fixed ratio, durations were longer in the first quarter of the ratio than in subsequent quarters. These data parallel observations of concurrent operant responding and salivation in dogs. In Experiment III, pigeons were exposed to a discrete trial, differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 6-sec schedule. Durations of responses in the first 2 sec of the trial were substantially shorter than those of responses that occurred later. The data from all three experiments support the view that the pigeon's "key peck" actually consists of two subclasses of peck, one reflexive and one operant.     

Pigeons' discrimination of paintings by Monet and Picasso

Pigeons successfully learned to discriminate color slides of paintings by Monet and Picasso. Following this training, they discriminated novel paintings by Monet and Picasso that had never been presented during the discrimination training. Furthermore, they showed generalization from Monet's to Cezanne's and Renoir's paintings or from Picasso's to Braque's and Matisse's paintings. These results suggest that pigeons' behavior can be controlled by complex visual stimuli in ways that suggest categorization. Upside-down images of Monet's paintings disrupted the discrimination, whereas inverted images of Picasso's did not. This result may indicate that the pigeons' behavior was controlled by objects depicted in impressionists' paintings but was not controlled by objects in cubists' paintings.     

Free-operant forgetting: Delayed stimulus control of multiple-schedule performance

Pigeons' responses were reinforced in two components of several multiple variable-interval variable-interval schedules of food reinforcement. In one component, the key was illuminated green for 15 seconds and white for 45 seconds. In the other component, the key was illuminated red for 15 seconds and white for 45 seconds. Values for the exponent of the power functions relating response ratios to reinforcement ratios were higher in the presence of the discriminative stimuli (green or red) than in the presence of white. Sensitivity of response ratios to changes in reinforcement ratios provided an index of the extent to which responding was under delayed stimulus control by prior discriminative stimuli.     

Dissociation of value and response strength

Four pigeons were exposed to multiple schedules and later to concurrent-chains schedules, with terminal links that had previously been multiple-schedule components. For 2 birds, the terminal-link schedules arranged an inverse relationship between response rate and reinforcement rate; for the other 2 birds a direct corresponding relationship was arranged. Those response rates were further modified by differentially reinforcing either longer or shorter interresponse times, relative to the current means. Although the birds' initial-link responses indicated preferences for terminal links with higher rates of reinforcement, in half the cases the birds responded during the terminal links in such a way as to produce lower rates of reinforcement, rates their initial-link behavior indicated they did not prefer. That outcome is inconsistent with maximization theory, but consistent with a strengthening analysis of behavior on single-key schedules.     

Within-session changes in responding during several simple schedules

Pigeons' key pecking was reinforced by food delivered by several fixed-interval, variable-ratio, and differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedules. Rate of responding, number of responses per reinforcer, length of postreinforcement pause, running response rate, and the time required to collect an available reinforcer changed systematically within sessions when the schedules provided high rates of reinforcement, but usually not when they provided low rates. These results suggest that the factors that produce within-session changes in responding are generally similar for different schedules of reinforcement. However, a separate factor may also contribute during variable-ratio schedules. The results question explanations for within-session changes that are related solely to the passage of time, to responding, and to one interpretation of attention. They support the idea that one or more factors related to reinforcement play a role.     

Delayed and current stimulus control in successive discriminations

In a successive discrimination in which successively alternating red and green hues signaled component variable-interval schedules, sensitivity of the ratio of responses in the two components to variation in the component reinforcer ratio decreased systematically during the course of the component. This decrease in stimulus control or discrimination over the course of the component was shown to be the result of delayed control of responding during the component by the stimulus transition between components. When the red–green stimulus transition was altered by interpolating a white stimulus at the end of each 60-s component, discrimination at the beginning of the component (measured by the power-function exponent for sensitivity to reinforcement) was reduced. Conditions with the white stimulus inserted in other quarters of the component indicated that the current discriminative stimulus exerts control over responding throughout the component, whereas during about the first half of the component, response differentials are influenced by the transition between discriminative stimuli.     

Autoshaped key pecking maintained by access to a social space.

When four experimentally naive pigeons were exposed to occasional forward pairings of a keylight followed by a doorlight (that signaled access to a large social space), all subjects began to peck the lit key. In a second experiment, where the keylight either preceded the presentation of the doorlight or was presented independently of it, key pecking was maintained only in the former circumstance. The unconditioned stimulus in these experiments--arrival in the social space--did not elicit pecking. Hence, the conditioned response of key pecking and the unconditioned response of entering the social space differed. This demonstration of autoshaping with a social-space unconditioned stimulus argues against a stimulus-substitution account of the findings.