A test of the negative discriminative stimulus as a reinforcer of observing

Five pigeons were used to test the hypothesis that the source of reinforcement for observing behavior is the information that it provides concerning the schedule of primary reinforcement. On a variable-interval schedule, pecking the left-hand key produced a 30-sec display of such information. During this 30-sec period, when pecking the right-hand key was reinforced on a random-interval schedule, both keys were green; when no reinforcement was scheduled (extinction) both keys were red. Later, this baseline procedure, in which both red and green were available, was replaced for blocks of sessions by procedures in which either (a) the red was eliminated and only the green could be produced; or (b) the green was eliminated and only the red could be produced. The results were that green maintained rates of pecking on the left key that were as high or higher than when both colors were available and that red maintained no responding. It was concluded that the reinforcing value of a stimulus depends on the positive or negative direction of its correlation with primary reinforcement, rather than upon the amount of information that it conveys.     

Punishment of observing by a stimulus associated with the lower of two reinforcement frequencies

Three pigeons were used to investigate the effects of a stimulus associated with the lower of two reinforcement frequencies on the response producing it. In a three-key chamber, pecking the center key produced grain on alternating variable-interval schedules with mean durations of 2 min or 30 sec. Initially, green illumination of the keys accompanied the more favorable (30-sec) schedule and red accompanied the less favorable (2-min) schedule. Then the keys remained yellow unless the bird pecked one of the side (observing) keys to produce the discriminative stimuli for a 30-sec period. Subsequently, when red was withheld as a possible consequence of pecking a particular side key, the rate on that key increased; when red was restored, the observing rate decreased. Thus the stimulus associated with less frequent reinforcement had a punishing effect on the behavior producing it. When green was withheld on one of the side keys and the other key produced both colors, observing behavior was not maintained on the red-only key, but was maintained on the key that produced both colors.     

Punishment as a discriminative stimulus and conditioned reinforcer with humans

Mental hospital patients were reinforced for responding in a two-response operant situation. When a noise was used to punish one of the responses, all subjects shifted to the unpunished one. When the noise was then paired with positive reinforcement, the subjects responded to produce the noise. Also, a novel response was reinforced by noise in the absence of other reinforcers. This study with humans extends the findings of previous studies with animals in revealing how a punishing stimulus can acquire discriminative or conditioned reinforcing properties.     

Airflow as a discriminative stimulus

In one experiment, pigeons were taught to discriminate airflow by having availability of reinforcement signalled by its presence and extinction signalled by its absence. After they reached criterion, some were trained on a discrimination reversal. Others were trained on an intradimensional discrimination with a low airflow velocity associated with reinforcement and a higher airflow velocity associated with extinction. All discriminations were learned rapidly, indicating that airflow velocity can function as a discriminative stimulus. In the second and third experiments, naive pigeons were trained to discriminate the presence of a compound stimulus (one of three tonal intensities paired with one of three airflow velocities) from its absence. These pigeons were subsequently given a component stimulus test during extinction on four stimulus values; the two training values, the tone alone, and the airflow alone. High or moderate velocity airflow controlled more responding than any of the three tone intensities. However, low velocity airflow controlled more responding only when a low intensity tone was employed.     

Control of responding by the elements of a compound discriminative stimulus and by the elements as individual discriminative stimuli

In the first of two studies, the responding of four albino rats was differentially reinforced in the presence of noise and light together and then tested in the presence of the noise and the light separately during extinction. The light exercised substantially more control of responding than did the noise. In the second study the responding of a similar group of four rats was differentially reinforced in the presence of the noise and the light separately. Control of responding by the light developed more rapidly than control by the noise. Results suggest that levels of control by stimuli after differential reinforcement with respect to the stimuli together can be predicted by the rates of development of control during differential reinforcement with respect to the stimuli separately.     

Characterization of the discriminative stimulus effects of lorcaserin in rats

Lorcaserin is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treating obesity and is under consideration for treating substance use disorders; it has agonist properties at serotonin (5‐HT)_2C receptors and might also have agonist properties at other 5‐HT receptor subtypes. This study used drug discrimination to investigate the mechanism(s) of action of lorcaserin. Male Sprague–Dawley rats discriminated 0.56 mg/kg i.p. lorcaserin from saline while responding under a fixed‐ratio 5 schedule for food. Lorcaserin (0.178‐1.0 mg/kg) dose‐dependently increased lorcaserin‐lever responding. The 5‐HT_2C receptor agonist mCPP and the 5‐HT_2A receptor agonist DOM each occasioned greater than 90% lorcaserin‐lever responding in seven of eight rats. The 5‐HT_1A receptor agonist 8‐OH‐DPAT occasioned greater than 90% lorcaserin‐lever responding in four of seven rats. The 5‐HT_2C receptor selective antagonist SB 242084 attenuated lorcaserin‐lever responding in all eight rats and the 5‐HT_2A receptor selective antagonist MDL 100907 attenuated lorcaserin‐lever responding in six of seven rats. These results suggest that, in addition to agonist properties at 5‐HT_2C receptors, lorcaserin also has agonist properties at 5‐HT_2A and 5‐HT_1A receptors. Because some drugs with 5‐HT_2A receptor agonist properties are abused, it is important to fully characterize the behavioral effects of lorcaserin while considering its potential for treating substance use disorders.     

Effects of stimulus duration on observing behavior maintained by differential reinforcement magnitude

Pigeons made observing responses for stimuli signalling the availability of either 10-sec or 2-sec access to grain on fixed-interval 1-min schedules. If observing responses did not occur, food-producing responses occurred to a stimulus common to both reinforcement magnitudes. When the stimuli remained on for the duration of the components and signalled differential reinforcement magnitudes, observing responses were maintained; however, when the stimuli remained on for 10 sec, observing responses decreased markedly. In addition, it was shown that the occasional presentation of the stimulus signalling 10-sec access to grain was necessary for the maintenance of observing behavior. A control condition demonstrated that when all the available stimuli signalled 6-sec access to grain, observing responses declined. Taken together, the results demonstrated that the occasional presentation of the stimulus that remained on for the duration of the component and signalled the larger reinforcement magnitude was necessary for the maintenance of observing behavior.     

Reduction of stimulus overselectivity with nonverbal differential observing responses

Three individuals with mental retardation exhibited stimulus overselectivity in a delayed matching-to-sample task in which two sample stimuli were displayed on each trial. Intermediate accuracy scores indicated that participants could match one of the samples but not both of them. Accuracy in a baseline condition was compared to accuracy with a differential observing response procedure. This procedure prompted participants to make simultaneous identity-matching responses that required observation and discrimination of both sample stimuli. These observing responses were never followed by differential consequences. When observing responses were prompted, participants' accuracy scores improved. In a return to the baseline condition, when differential observing responses were no longer prompted, accuracy returned to intermediate levels. The results show that stimulus overselectivity can be greatly reduced by a behavioral intervention that controls observing behavior and verifies discrimination, but that exposure to such procedures alone may be insufficient for lasting benefits.     

Reducing overselective stimulus control with differential observing responses

Overselective stimulus control refers to discriminative control in which the number of controlling stimuli is too limited for effective behavior. Experiment 1 included 22 special‐education students who exhibited overselective stimulus control on a two‐sample delayed matching task. An intervention added a compound identity matching opportunity within the sample observation period of the matching trials. The compound matching functioned as a differential observing response (DOR) in that high accuracy verified observation and discrimination of both sample stimuli. Nineteen participants learned to perform the DOR and two‐sample delayed matching accuracy increased substantially for 16 of them. When the DOR was completely withdrawn after 10 sessions, accuracy declined. In Experiment 2, a more gradual withdrawal of DOR requirements showed that highly accurate performance could be maintained with the DOR on only a proportion of trials for most participants. The results show that DOR training may lead to a general improvement in observing behavior.     

Effects of stimulus control and deprivation upon discriminative responding

Discriminative responding in pigeons was studied under multiple variable-interval extinction schedules in which extinction was correlated with either a tone or a white keylight. The two procedures resulted in weak and strong stimulus control, respectively. In the first experiment, there was no interaction between schedule components when stimulus control was strong and reinforcement was omitted under the previously reinforced component. However, there was marked induction between components when stimulus control was weak and responding was extinguished under the previously reinforced component. In the second experiment, hours of food deprivation was varied under two levels of stimulus control. Deprivation mainly influenced response rates under the extinction stimulus, with greater absolute rate increases occurring the lower the existing level of stimulus control. Increases in responding during the extinction stimulus were four times as great from 24 to 72 hours of deprivation as from 24 to 48 hours under conditions of both high and low stimulus control.     

Compound stimulus control by discriminative stimuli associated with high and moderate response rates

Four rats received water on a fixed-ratio schedule for lever pressing in the presence of a tone (or light) stimulus and on a variable-interval schedule in the presence of a light (or tone) stimulus. Following stabilization of a high response rate during the fixed-ratio component and a moderate response rate during the variable-interval component, brief periods with the light and tone presented simultaneously but with no responses reinforced were inserted into the regular training schedule. Response rates during the compound stimuli were intermediate between the response rates controlled by the individual fixed-ratio and variable-interval associated stimuli.     

Transfer across drives of the discriminative effect of a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus

Previous results suggest that a stimulus paired in Pavlovian fashion with reward should exert some discriminative control over an unrelated operant response acquired under a different drive-reward system. In the following experiment, a stimulus was first paired with food reinforcement for a hungry rat. Subsequently, the animal learned to lever-press for water reinforcements when thirsty but not hungry. Finally, the control over lever-pressing of the food-paired stimulus was tested by presenting it at various times during extinction of the lever-pressing response. All animals in the experiment showed the expected effect; each emitted more lever-presses during periods of the food-paired stimulus than during alternate control periods.