Combining stimuli signalling response-dependent food and shock

Three rats were exposed to a multiple schedule in which separate presentations of light and tone alternated with periods during which light and tone were absent. In Phase 1, light and tone each signalled identical variable-interval schedules of food delivery. In Phase 2, light and tone signalled separate but concurrent variable-interval schedules of food and shock delivery. In both phases, the absence of light and tone was associated with the differential reinforcement of other behavior. Test presentations of light, tone, and a light-plus-tone combination indicated that in both phases, light-plus-tone controlled higher response rates than either light or tone alone. The combination continued to control enhanced responding even when the test stimuli signalled variable-interval schedules of food and fixed-ratio schedules of shock. In these latter sessions, enhanced control by the combination increased shock frequency with no corresponding change in food frequency. Apparently, the level of behavior controlled by the absence of two single stimuli may be more important than the consequences of responding in determining the effects of combined-stimulus presentations.     

Compounding discriminative stimuli controlling free-operant avoidance

The performances of three rats were stabilized on a multiple schedule that maintained responding by a free-operant avoidance schedule during independent presentations of tone and light. The simultaneous absence of these stimuli signalled shock-free periods and controlled response cessation. Subsequently, test sessions were administered consisting of independent presentations of each stimulus and these stimuli compounded (tone-plus-light). During an extinction test, additive summation was observed to the compounded stimuli, i.e., more responses were emitted to the compound than to either tone or light. During a series of 28 maintenance-test sessions in which the shock schedule remained operative, the compounded stimuli produced a generally enhanced response rate and fewer pauses terminating with shock than either single stimulus condition. These results extend the generality of free-operant additive summation to responding maintained by aversive control. In addition, a comparison of the present study with previous experiments reporting additive summation of positively reinforced responding indicates that similar variables—rate and aversive differences between training stimulus conditions—should be considered in accounting for response distributions during stimulus compounding when responding is controlled by either positive or negative contingencies.     

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.     

The effects of brief stimuli presented under a multiple schedule of second-order schedules

The effects of briefly presented stimuli paired or not paired with food reinforcement were investigated in the pigeon on a multiple schedule containing second-order schedules. A stimulus paired with food reinforcement was presented on a variable-interval schedule in one unit of the multiple schedule and either a stimulus not paired with food reinforcement or no stimuli were scheduled in the other unit. Response rates were highest when behavior was followed by the food-paired stimulus. Presentation of the food-paired stimulus at completion of each 1-min variable-interval component maintained a steady rate of responding between consecutive food presentations. Pausing following food reinforcement was greatest in the second-order schedule not containing the paired stimulus. Reversing the stimulus pairings led to a reversal of the relative response rates and patterns of responding for each stimulus.     

Changeover behavior and preference in concurrent schedules

Pigeons were trained on a multiple schedule of reinforcement in which separate concurrent schedules occurred in each of two components. Key pecking was reinforced with milo. During one component, a variable-interval 40-s schedule was concurrent with a variable-interval 20-s schedule; during the other component, a variable-interval 40-s schedule was concurrent with a variable-interval 80-s schedule. During probe tests, the stimuli correlated with the two variable-interval 40-s schedules were presented simultaneously to assess preference, measured by the relative response rates to the two stimuli. In Experiment 1, the concurrently available variable-interval 20-s schedule operated normally; that is, reinforcer availability was not signaled. Following this baseline training, relative response rate during the probes favored the variable-interval 40-s alternative that had been paired with the lower valued schedule (i.e., with the variable-interval 80-s schedule). In Experiment 2, a signal for reinforcer availability was added to the high-value alternative (i.e., to the variable-interval 20-s schedule), thus reducing the rate of key pecking maintained by that schedule but leaving the reinforcement rate unchanged. Following that baseline training, relative response rates during probes favored the variable-interval 40-s alternative that had been paired with the higher valued schedule. The reversal in the pattern of preference implies that the pattern of changeover behavior established during training, and not reinforcement rate, determined the preference patterns obtained on the probe tests.     

Positive reinforcement and suppression from the same occurrence of the unconditioned stimulus in a positive conditioned suppression procedure

Responding of rats was maintained on a variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement. The same response also produced a blinking light followed by electrical brain stimulation according to a fixed-interval schedule. This conjoint schedule produced two behavioral changes. First, instead of a steady rate of responding throughout the session, which would be characteristic of the variable interval food schedule alone, responding between occurrences of the light-brain stimulation pairings became positively accelerated and thus was more characteristic of the fixed-interval schedule of these pairings. Second, food responding was suppressed during the light that preceded brain stimulation. These results indicate that positive reinforcement and suppression resulted from the same occurrence of the light-brain stimulation combination. This finding suggests that stimuli such as conditioned reinforcers that precede an unconditioned reinforcer may have a suppressive effect upon responding in their presence that is being maintained by another reinforcer.     

Response discriminative and reinforcement factors in stimulus control of performance on multiple and chained schedules of reinforcement

Discriminative control of the response rates of two groups of rats was equated by training them to cease bar pressing in light-out no-tone ( + ) and to respond during tone and light. Multiple-schedule subjects received food at the same rate for responding during tone or light as for nonresponding in + . For the chained-schedule subjects responding in tone or light only produced + where food was received for nonresponding. In extinction tests multiple-schedule subjects emitted approximately twice the responses to tone-plus-light as to tone or light presented individually (additive summation). The rats trained on the chained schedule, in which the tone and light each controlled substantial response rates but were never paired with food, showed no summation when the tone and light were presented together. The results indicate that discriminative control of response rates and reinforcement differences between schedule components determine stimulus control.     

A response-spacing effect: an absence of responding during response-feedback stimuli

In most studies of operant reinforcement a response-feedback stimulus is used which is so brief that the nature of the responding during it is virtually undetectable. The present study investigated the nature of this responding by lengthening an initially brief feedback stimulus. The key-pecking responses of pigeons were maintained by a variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement. Each response produced a brief stimulus light in addition to the usual auditory response feedback. When the duration of the feedback stimulus light was gradually increased, it was found to control a nearly zero rate of responding. The result was a paced, metronomic-like performance in which the pigeon made a single response, paused until the stimulus terminated, and then responded again. As a result, the overall response rate was greatly reduced; the mean interresponse time approximated the stimulus duration. A plausible interpretation is that brief feedback stimuli acquire control over responding because they coincide with few responses and few reinforcers. These findings show that in addition to their known functions as conditioned-reinforcing stimuli and discriminative stimuli, response-feedback stimuli also exert direct stimulus control: responding is reduced during the feedback stimulus itself.     

The influence of positive and negative reinforcement on selective attention in the rat

In Experiments 1 and 2 rats were trained under two multiple schedules of reinforcement. In one, bar pressing during a tone-light compound stimulus was reinforced under a variable-interval food reinforcement schedule. In the other multiple schedule, bar pressing avoided grid shock on a free-operant schedule. In both multiple schedules, a discrimination was maintained by an extinction schedule that was operative during the absence of the tone-light compound. In Experiments 1 and 2 the intensity of the tone-light compound was manipulated over three levels. Subsequent extinction tests revealed that light was attended to, almost exclusively of the tone, when food reinforcement had maintained bar pressing. On the other hand, the tone gained considerable attentional control under the shock avoidance schedule. This stimulus-reinforcer interaction was maintained for all three levels of the compound intensity. In Experiment 3 it was investigated whether this interaction was associative by presenting shock during the absence of the tone-light compound when food reinforcement maintained responding, and food during the absence of the compound when shock avoidance maintained responding. Since both food and shock were presented during a single session for both schedules, nonassociative effects of the reinforcing stimuli were equivalent across the schedules. Nevertheless, the stimulus-reinforcer interaction was maintained, indicating that the interaction was an associative effect.     

Discrimination training and stimulus compounding: consideration of non-reinforcement and response differentiation consequences of S

In Exp. 1, four rats were trained on a two-component multiple schedule with tone and light each associated with different variable-interval schedules. Extinction in light-out no-tone, common to previous studies reporting additive summation to compounded discriminative stimuli, was omitted from training. In testing, the simultaneous presentation of tone and light controlled a response rate intermediate between that controlled by these stimuli presented singly. In Exp. 2, animals were trained on three-ply multiple schedules. While tone and light were each associated with variable-interval schedules for both groups, light-out no-tone signalled extinction for one and differential-reinforcement-of-behavior-other-than-bar-pressing for the other. This permitted response reduction during light-out no-tone to be viewed independently of non-reinforcement. Responding of both groups showed summation to tone plus light in testing, with the effect clearly larger for extinction-trained subjects. These experiments indicate that: (1) discrimination training afforded by extinction has been integral to additive summation previously reported, (2) response differentiation and non-reinforcement consequences of extinction training contribute to the magnitude of summation, and (3) summation and peak shift might be functionally related phenomena.     

The economics of daily consumption controlling food- and water-reinforced responding

In the first experiment, two rhesus monkeys earned their entire ration of food and water during daily sessions with no provisions to ensure constant daily intakes. Two variable-interval schedules of food presentations were concurrent with one variable-interval schedule of water presentations; the maximum rate of food presentations arranged by one food schedule was varied. As the rate of food presentations was increased, the absolute level of responding on the two food schedules combined decreased, while responding on the water schedule increased. The preference for the variable food schedule compared to the other food schedule approximately matched the proportion of reinforcers obtained from it. The preference for the variable food schedule compared to the water schedule did not match, but greatly decreased, as the proportion of reinforcers from the food schedule increased. When Experiment I was replicated, with provisions to ensure constant daily intakes of food and water (Experiment II), the absolute response rates under the two food schedules combined and under the water schedule no longer changed with increases in the rate of food during the sessions. On the other hand, choice between the two food schedules remained proportional to the distribution of obtained food pellets. These results were interpreted as indicating that behavior to obtain nonsubstitutable commodities, such as food and water, is strongly controlled by the economic conditions of daily consumption, while choice between substitutable commodities is independent of these factors.     

Response-independent Events In The Behavior Stream

The metaphor of the behavior stream provides a framework for studying the effects of response-independent food presentations intruded into an environment in which operant responding of pigeons was maintained by variable-interval schedules. In the first two experiments, response rates were reduced when response-independent food was intruded during the variable-interval schedule according to a concomitantly present fixed-time schedule. These reductions were not always an orderly function of the percentage of response-dependent food. Negatively accelerated patterns of key pecking across the fixed-time period occurred in Experiment 1 under the concomitant fixed-time variable-interval schedules. In Experiment 2, positively and negatively accelerated and linear response patterns occurred even though the schedules were similar to those used in Experiment 1. The variable findings in the first two experiments led to three subsequent experiments that were designed to further illuminate the controlling variables of the effects of intruded response-independent events. When the fixed and variable schedules were correlated with distinct operanda by employing a concurrent fixed-interval variable-interval schedule (Experiment 3) or with distinct discriminative stimuli (Experiments 4 and 5), negatively accelerated response patterns were obtained. Even in these latter cases, however, the response patterns were a joint function of the physical separation of the two schedules and the ratio of fixed-time or fixed-interval to variable-interval schedule food presentations. The results of the five experiments are discussed in terms of the contributions of both reinforcement variables and discriminative stimuli in determining the effects of intruding response-independent food into a stream of operant behavior.     

Discrimination learning, the peak shift, and behavioral contrast

A discrimination between two successively alternating stimuli was trained under conditions that maintained equal frequencies of reinforcement in the presence of each of the discriminative stimuli (S1 and S2) but that also reduced the rate of responding to S2. These conditions included a multiple variable-interval differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule and a multiple variable-interval variable-interval schedule in which responses to S2 were punished. Whenever the rate of responding to S2 was reduced, rate of responding to S1 (behavioral contrast) increased, and the peak of a subsequently obtained generalization gradient did not occur at the expected location (between S1 and S2) but was displaced away from S2, below S1. Discrimination training in which the frequencies of reinforcement earned in S1 and S2 were not equal (variable-interval 1-min variable-interval 5-min training) produced contrast and the peak shift only if the rate of responding to S2 had been reduced, as after non-differential reinforcement in which variable-interval 1-min schedules were correlated with S1 and with S2. It was concluded that a sufficient condition for the occurrence of behavioral contrast and the peak shift was reduction of the rate of responding to one of two alternating discriminative stimuli and that a peak shift will occur only if contrast had occurred during discrimination training.     

Summation of punishment suppression

In two experiments, eight rats were trained to lever press with food on a variable-interval schedule. Bar pressing produced shock on a variable-interval schedule in the presence of two independently presented stimuli, a light and a tone. Two rats in each experiment received alternative presentations of the light and the tone and were consequently always in the presence of a stimulus that signalled variable-interval punishment. The other two rats in each experiment were treated similarly except that they received periods in which neither light nor tone was present. During these periods, bar pressing was not punished. The two stimuli that signalled punishment were then presented simultaneously to evaluate the effect of stimulus compounding on response suppression. The subjects trained without punishment-free periods did not show summation to the compound stimulus; the subjects trained with punishment-free periods showed summation of suppression. The major difference between the two experiments was the longer mean interval of variable-interval punishment used in the second experiment. This manipulation made the summation effect more resistant to extinction and thus increased its magnitude.     

The relative law of effect: effects of shock intensity on response strength in multiple schedules

Key pecking of four birds was reinforced with food according to a two-component multiple variable-interval 1-minute variable-interval 4-minute schedule. In addition, key pecking was punished by a brief shock according to a variable-interval 30-second schedule during both components of the multiple schedule. The intensity of the shock was varied. For all birds, punishment had a stronger suppressive effect on the responding maintained by the leaner food schedule, and the ratio of responding during the two components of the multiple schedule became closer to the ratio of reinforcement as shock intensity was increased, as the relative law of effect predicts. At the higher shock intensity, there was some evidence that the ratio of responses overmatched the ratio of reinforcements.     

Effects of chlordiazepoxide and d-amphetamine on responding suppressed by conditioned punishment

Key pecking by two pigeons, maintained under a variable-interval two-minute schedule of food presentation, was suppressed when each response produced a five-second visual stimulus that was occasionally paired with shock. Stimulus-shock pairings occurred independently of responding according to a variable-time six-minute schedule for one bird or once per session for the other bird. The effects of chlordiazepoxide and d-amphetamine were assessed on this baseline of behavior suppressed by conditioned punishment. Chlordiazepoxide produced dose-related increases in the rate of punished responding, whereas d-amphetamine produced only decreases. In addition, chlordiazepoxide produced dose-related increases in response rate during the response-produced and response-independent stimulus presentations; d-amphetamine, however, only decreased responding during stimulus presentations.     

Response-independent food delivery and behavioral resistance to change

Response-independent food was delivered during a dark-key phase between two multiple-schedule components to explore its disruptive effects on responding. Responding in components was maintained by separate variable-interval 120-s schedules, with a 2-s reinforcer in Component 1 and a 6-s reinforcer in Component 2. Across conditions the rate and duration of response-independent food presentations were manipulated. The results showed that response rates in both components decreased as a function of the duration and the rate of response-independent food presentations; moreover, the decrease in response rate relative to the baseline level was larger in Component 1 than in Component 2. These findings were consistent with expectations from behavioral momentum theory, which predicts that if equal disruption (response-independent food in this case) is applied to responding in two components, then the ratio of response-rate change in Component 1 versus Component 2 should remain constant, irrespective of the magnitude of that disruption.     

Resistance to change and relapse of observing

Four experiments examined relapse of extinguished observing behavior of pigeons using a two-component multiple schedule of observing-response procedures. In both components, unsignaled periods of variable-interval (VI) food reinforcement alternated with extinction and observing responses produced stimuli associated with the availability of the VI schedule (i.e., S+). The components differed in the rate of food arranged (Rich = VI 30 s; Lean = VI 120 s). In Experiment 1, following baseline training, extinction of observing involved removal of both food and S+ deliveries, and reinstatement was examined by presenting either response-independent food or S+ deliveries. In Experiment 2, extinction involved removal of only food deliveries while observing responses continued to produce S+. Reinstatement was examined by delivering food contingent upon the first two food-key responses occurring in the presence of the S+. Experiment 3 assessed ABA renewal of observing by extinguishing food-key and observing responses in the presence of one contextual stimulus (i.e., B) and then returning to the original training context (i.e., A) during continued extinction. Experiment 4 examined resurgence by introducing food reinforcement for an alternative response during extinction, and subsequently removing that alternative source of food. Across experiments, relative resistance to extinction and relapse of observing tended to be greater in the component previously associated with the higher rate of primary reinforcement. Relapse of observing or attending to stimuli associated with primary reinforcement appears to be impacted by frequency of primary reinforcement in a manner similar to responding maintained directly by primary reinforcement.     

Schedules using noxious stimuli. III. Responding maintained with response-produced electric shocks

Responding was maintained in two squirrel monkeys under several variations of a 10-min fixed-interval schedule of electric shock presentation. The monkeys were first trained under a 2-min variable-interval schedule of food presentation, and then under a concurrent schedule of food presentation and shock presentation. In one monkey, when shocks (12.6 ma) followed each response during the last minute of an 11-min cycle ending with a timeout period, responding was increased during the first 10 min and suppressed during the last minute of each cycle. When the shock schedule was eliminated, both the enhancement and suppression disappeared, and a steady rate of responding was maintained under the variable-interval schedule. When the food schedule was eliminated, the shock schedule maintained a characteristic fixed-interval pattern of responding during the first 10 min, but suppressed responding during the last minute of each cycle. The fixed-interval pattern of responding was maintained when the timeout period was eliminated and when only one shock could occur at the end of the cycle. In the second monkey, responding under the concurrent food and shock schedule was suppressed when responses produced shocks after 3-min. Under an 11-min cycle, responding continued to be maintained at increasing shock intensities. When the food schedule was eliminated, a fixed-interval pattern of responding was maintained under a 10-min schedule of shock presentation (12.6 ma). Whether response-produced electric shocks suppressed responding or maintained responding depended on the schedule of shock presentation.     

Food-paired stimuli as conditioned reinforcers: effects of d-amphetamine.

Seven pigeons were studied in two experiments in which key pecks were reinforced under a second-order schedule wherein satisfaction of variable-interval schedule requirements produced food or a brief stimulus. In the second part of each session, responses produced only the brief stimulus according to a variable-interval schedule (food extinction). For the 4 pigeons in Experiment 1, the response key was red throughout the session. In separate phases, the brief stimulus was either paired with food, not paired with food, or not presented during extinction. d-Amphetamine (0.3 to 10.0 mg/kg) dose-dependently reduced food-maintained responding during the first part of the session and, at intermediate dosages, increased responding during the extinction portion of the session. The magnitude of these increases, however, did not consistently depend on whether the brief stimulus was paired, not paired, or not presented. It was also true that under nondrug conditions, response rates during extinction did not differ reliably depending on pairing operations for the brief stimulus. In Experiment 2, 3 different pigeons responded under a procedure wherein the key was red in the component with food presentations and blue in the extinction component (i.e., multiple schedule). Again, d-amphetamine produced dose-related decreases in responding during the first part of a session and increases in responding in the second part of the session. These increases, however, were related to the pairing operations; larger increases were observed when the brief stimulus was paired with food than when it was not or when it was not presented at all. Under nondrug conditions, the paired brief stimulus controlled higher response rates during extinction than did a nonpaired stimulus or no stimulus. These findings suggest that d-amphetamine can enhance the efficacy of conditioned reinforcers, and that this effect may be more robust if conditioned reinforcers occur in the context of a signaled period of extinction.