Stimulus generalization and the response-reinforcement contingency

Generalization gradients along a line-tilt continuum were obtained from groups of pigeons that had been trained to peck a key on different schedules of reinforcement. In Exp. I, gradients following training on a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedule proved to be much flatter than gradients following the usual 1-min variable interval (VI) training. In Exp. II, the value of the VI schedule itself was parametrically studied; Ss trained on long VI schedules (e.g., 4-min) produced much flatter gradients than Ss trained on short VI schedules (30-sec; 1-min). The results were interpreted mainly in terms of the relative control exerted by internal, proprioceptive cues on the different reinforcement schedules. Several implications of the results for other problems in the field of stimulus generalization are discussed.     

Stimulus generalization of behavioral history: Interspecies generality and persistence of generalization gradients

Four pigeons were exposed to a tandem variable-interval (VI) fixed-ratio (FR) schedule in the presence of a 50-pixel (about 15 mm) square or an 80-pixel (about 24 mm) square and to a tandem VI differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedule when a second 80-pixel or 50-pixel square was present. The values of the VI and FR schedules were adjusted to equate reinforcement rates in the two tandem schedules. Following this, a square-size continuum generalization test was administered under a fixed-interval (FI) schedule or extinction. In the first testing session, response frequency was a graded function of the similarity of the test stimuli to the training stimuli for all pigeons. These systematic generalization gradients persisted longer under the FI schedule than under extinction.     

Discriminability between alternatives in a switching-key concurrent schedule

Six pigeons were trained to discriminate between two intensities of white light in a symbolic matching-to-sample procedure. These stimuli were then used to signal which schedule was available on the main key in a switching-key concurrent schedule. The concurrent schedules led to a symbolic matching-to-sample phase in which the subject identified the concurrent schedule to which it last responded before a reinforcer could be obtained. The concurrent schedules were varied across conditions. Discriminability, measured during the symbolic matching-to-sample performance, was high throughout and did not differ across the two procedures. Performance in the concurrent schedules was like that typically obtained using these schedules. Delays were then arranged between completion of the concurrent schedules and presentations of the symbolic matching-to-sample phase. A series of conditions with an intervening delay of 10 s showed that both concurrent-schedule performance and symbolic matching-to-sample performance were affected by the delay in a similar way; that is, choice responding was closer to indifference.     

Recent reinforcement-schedule research and applied behavior analysis

Reinforcement schedules are considered in relation to applied behavior analysis by examining several recent laboratory experiments with humans and other animals. The experiments are drawn from three areas of contemporary schedule research: behavioral history effects on schedule performance, the role of instructions in schedule performance of humans, and dynamic schedules of reinforcement. All of the experiments are discussed in relation to the role of behavioral history in current schedule performance. The paper concludes by extracting from the experiments some more general issues concerning reinforcement schedules in applied research and practice.     

Response rate and sensitivity to the molar feedback function relating response and reinforcement rate on VI+ schedules of reinforcement

In 5 experiments, the author examined rats' sensitivity to the molar feedback function relating response rate to reinforcement rate on schedules of reinforcement. These studies demonstrated that, at lower rates of responding, rats' performance on variable ratio (VR), variable interval (VI), and variable interval with linear feedback loop (VI+) schedules was determined largely by reinforcement of interresponse times; response rates were faster on VR than on both VI and VI+ schedules. In contrast, when procedures were adopted to maintain high rates of response, rats showed sensitivity to the molar characteristics of the schedules; they responded as fast on a VI+ schedule as on a VR schedule and faster on both of these schedules than on a yoked VI schedule. When the variance of response rate was manipulated, this factor was noted as an important element in determining sensitivity to the molar characteristics of the schedule.     

Concurrent random-interval schedules and the matching law

In Experiment I, a group of eight pigeons performed on concurrent random-interval schedules constructed by holding probability equal and varying cycle time to produce ratios of reinforcer densities of 1:1, 3:1, and 5:1 for key pecking. Schedules for a second group of seven were constructed with equal cycle times and unequal probabilities. Both groups deviated from simple matching, but the two forms of the schedules appeared to produce no consistent patterns of deviation. The data were found to be consistent with those obtained in concurrent variable-interval situations. The parameters of the matching equation in the form of Y=k X^a were estimated; the value of k was unity and a was 0.84. In Experiment II, six pigeons were exposed to two conc RI RI schedules in which one component increasingly approximated an FI schedule. The value of k was not 1.0. Concurrent RI RI schedules were shown to represent a continuum from conc FI VI to conc VI VI schedules. The use of the exponential equation in testing “matching laws” suggests that a<1 will continue to be observed, and this will set limits on the form of new laws and the assumed or rational values of the component variables in these laws.     

The relation between response rates and reinforcement rates in a multiple schedule

In a multiple schedule, exteroceptive stimuli change when the reinforcement schedule is changed. Each performance in a multiple schedule may be considered concurrent with other behavior. Accordingly, two variable-interval schedules of reinforcement were arranged in a multiple schedule, and a third, common variable-interval schedule was programmed concurrently with each of the first two. A quantitative statement was derived that relates as a ratio the response rates for the first two (multiple) variable-interval schedules. The value of the ratio depends on the rates of reinforcement provided by those schedules and the reinforcement rate provided by the common variable-interval schedule. The following implications of the expression were evaluated in an experiment with pigeons: (a) if the reinforcement rates for the multiple variable-interval schedules are equal, then the ratio of response rates is unity at all reinforcement rates of the common schedule; (b) if the reinforcement rates for the multiple schedules are unequal, then the ratio of response rates increases as the reinforcement rate provided by the common schedule increases; (c) the limit of the ratio is equal to the ratio of the reinforcement rates. Satisfactory confirmation was obtained for the first two implications, but the third was left in doubt.     

Varying response-reinforcer contiguity in a recycling conjunctive schedule

Three experiments describe the effects of manipulating the frequency of response-reinforcer contiguity in a recycling conjunctive schedule. The schedule arranged that a reinforcer was delivered after 30 s provided at least one response had occurred; otherwise the next cycle started immediately. In Experiment 1, this schedule produced the typical pause–respond–pause pattern, with most responses at mid-interval; and, when a limited number of contiguities between responses and food delivery were added, the pattern became more like the monotonic scallop seen on fixed-interval schedules. In Experiment 2, the schedule was initially presented with an additional contingency that allowed contiguity on every trial. Fixed-interval-like behavior occurred and tended to persist as contiguities were gradually eliminated. In Experiment 3, the recycling conjunctive schedule alternated with a condition in which a large number of contiguities occurred. The pause–respond–pause pattern and fixed-interval-like performance occurred with few or many contiguities, respectively. The results of all three experiments illustrate how contiguity interacts with a small number of other variables to determine performance on interval schedules and illuminate previous findings with fixed-interval and fixed-time schedules.     

Choice, changeover, and travel: A quantitative model

Six pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval schedules in which responding on fixed-interval schedules was required to give access to the alternate schedule. Responding on the concurrent schedules was not allowed, after changing over had commenced, until the changeover schedule had been completed. In Parts 1 to 3 of the experiment, the changeover fixed-interval schedules were equal and were 0 s, 10 s, and 20 s, respectively. In each part, the relative frequency of reinforcement obtained on the concurrent schedules was varied over at least five conditions. In Part 4, the concurrent schedules were equal, and one changeover fixed-interval schedule was twice the other. Under these conditions, the absolute sizes of the changeover schedules were varied. Increasing the changeover requirement from 0 s to 10 s (Parts 1 and 2) resulted in increases in the sensitivity of behavior allocation to reinforcers obtained, but no further increase was obtained when the changeover schedules were increased to 20 s (Part 3). In Part 4, performance was biased towards the concurrent schedule that took less time to enter. These results are consistent with a subtractive punishment model of travel in which the degree of punishment is measured by the number of reinforcers apparently lost from a schedule when the subject changes to that schedule. Absolute times spent on the main keys could be accurately described by a previous model of changeover performance.     

Computer program to generate operant schedules

A computer program for programming schedules of reinforcement is described. Students can use the program to experience schedules of reinforcement that are typically used with nonhuman subjects. A cumulative recording of a student’s responding can be shown on the screen and/or printed with the computer’s printer. The program can also be used to program operant schedules for animal subjects. The program was tested with human subjects experiencing fixed ratio, variable ratio, fixed interval, and variable interval schedules. Performance for human subjects on a given schedule was similar to performance for nonhuman subjects on the same schedule.     

Effect of schizotypy on responding maintained by free-operant schedules of reinforcement

Deviations from otherwise reliable patterns of responding in human performance on schedules of reinforcement could be associated with personality characteristics, such as psychometrically-measured schizotypy. The present study examined differences between high and low scorers on four schizotypy subscales (unusual experiences, cognitive disorganisation, introvertive anhedonia and impulsive non-conformity) on a random-ratio (RR) and random-interval (RI) schedule of reinforcement. Results showed a higher rate of responding on the RR than RI schedule, consistent with the differences in performance normally observed between these schedules. However, these differences were dependant on whether or not participants scored high or low on the schizotypy subscales, as well as the specific schedule parameters between the schedules. Specifically, high scorers on the unusual experiences (UE) subscale of the O-LIFE(B) were the only group in Experiment 1 not to show a difference in schedule performance, suggesting high scores on this subscale are linked to altered RR and RI performance. Experiment 2 explored this finding further using different schedule parameters, and confirmed that high scorers in UE did not differ in response rates between the two schedules.     

Fixed-ratio and variable-ratio schedules of brief stimuli in second-order schedules of matching to sample

Eight pigeons matched to sample under second-order schedules of food reinforcement. Under fixed-interval unit schedules, the first correct match to occur after a given period of time was followed by the presentation of a brief stimulus. The termination of the last fixed-interval unit schedule was followed by food according to second-order fixed-ratio and variable-ratio schedules. In Experiment 1, as the number of fixed-interval unit schedules increased, long pauses occurred under the second-order fixed-ratio schedules, but not under the variable-ratio schedules. The similarity of performance measures such as local rate and accuracy indicated that the differences engendered by these two types of schedule are in the duration of the periods of not-responding. In Experiment 2, the addition of a brief stimulus at the end of each unit schedule in chained schedules that had different discriminative stimuli present for the duration of each unit did not substantially affect the performance, and long pauses continued to occur. However, few long pauses occurred under schedules with brief stimulus presentations alone. The most inaccurate performances were engendered by chained schedules without brief stimuli.     

Preference and resistance to change in concurrent variable-interval schedules

Pigeons were trained on a multiple schedule in which separate concurrent schedules were presented in the two components of the schedule. During one component, concurrent variable-interval 40-sec variable-interval 80-sec schedules operated. In the second component, concurrent variable-interval 40-sec variable-interval 20-sec schedules operated. After stable baseline performance was obtained in both components, extinction probe choice tests were presented to assess preference between the variable-interval 40-sec schedules from the two components. The variable-interval 40-sec schedule paired with the variable-interval 80-sec schedule was preferred over the variable-interval 40-sec schedule paired with the variable-interval 20-sec schedule. The subjects were also exposed to several resistance-to-change manipulations: (1) prefeeding prior to the experimental session, (2) a free-food schedule added to timeout periods separating components, and (3) extinction. The results indicated that preference and resistance to change do not necessarily covary.     

Tests of behavior momentum in simple and multiple schedules with rats and pigeons.

Four experiments examined the relationship between rate of reinforcement and resistance to change in rats' and pigeons' responses under simple and multiple schedules of reinforcement. In Experiment 1, 28 rats responded under either simple fixed-ratio, variable-ratio, fixed-interval, or variable-interval schedules; in Experiment 2, 3 pigeons responded under simple fixed-ratio schedules. Under each schedule, rate of reinforcement varied across four successive conditions. In Experiment 3, 14 rats responded under either a multiple fixed-ratio schedule or a multiple fixed-interval schedule, each with two components that differed in rate of reinforcement. In Experiment 4, 7 pigeons responded under either a multiple fixed-ratio or a multiple fixed-interval schedule, each with three components that also differed in rate of reinforcement. Under each condition of each experiment, resistance to change was studied by measuring schedule-controlled performance under conditions with prefeeding, response-independent food during the schedule or during timeouts that separated components of the multiple schedules, and by measuring behavior under extinction. There were no consistent differences between rats and pigeons. There was no direct relationship between rates of reinforcement and resistance to change when rates of reinforcement varied across successive conditions in the simple schedules. By comparison, in the multiple schedules there was a direct relationship between rates of reinforcement and resistance to change during most tests of resistance to change. The major exception was delivering response-independent food during the schedule; this disrupted responding, but there was no direct relationship between rates of reinforcement and resistance to change in simple- or multiple-schedule contexts. The data suggest that rate of reinforcement determines resistance to change in multiple schedules, but that this relationship does not hold under simple schedules.     

Sequential effects in dimensional contrast

Two experiments examined pigeons' response rates during short trials signaled by stimuli closely spaced along a wavelength continuum. In Experiment 1 separate halves of the continuum were correlated with different reinforcement schedules. In Experiment 2, the middle stimulus was accompanied by a lower probability of reinforcement than were the remaining wavelengths. Both procedures resulted in dimensional contrast “shoulders,” seen as relatively enhanced or depressed response rates in the presence of stimuli between the extreme of the continuum and the border separating the positive and negative stimuli. Sequential analyses addressed possible contributions of the following interactions: (a) local contrast, seen when rate during a given schedule depends on the schedule in the just-preceding trial; (b) modification of local contrast by the similarity of the signaling stimuli (P. Blough, 1983); and (c) schedule-independent rate contrast, seen when rate in a given trial depends on the rate controlled by the stimulus that accompanied the just-preceding trial (Malone & Rowe, 1981). Dimensional contrast functions were similar when isolated according to the schedule, to the similarity of the signaling stimulus, and to the response rate of the just-preceding trial. The interactions noted above do not appear to make important contributions to this effect.     

Multiple and concurrent schedule performance: independence from concurrent and successive schedule contexts

Six pigeons were trained on multiple variable-interval schedules and performance was measured in the presence or absence of another variable-interval schedule (the common schedule) arranged concurrently with both components. Manipulations included varying the rate of reinforcement on the common schedule, leaving the common schedule unchanged while the components of the multiple schedule were varied, varying the multiple schedule components in the absence of the common schedule, and varying one component of the multiple schedule while the other component and the common schedule were unchanged. The normal rate-increasing and rate-decreasing effects of reinforcement rate increase were found, except that changing one multiple schedule component did not affect the response rate in the successively available common schedule component. Both concurrent and multiple schedule performance undermatched obtained reinforcement-rate ratios, but the degree of undermatching in multiple schedules was reliably greater. Allocation of responses between multiple schedule components was unaffected by the concurrent availability of reinforcement, and allocation of responses between concurrent schedules was unaffected by the successive availability of different reinforcement rates.     

Behavioral effects of pairing an SD with a decreasing limited-hold reinforcement schedule

Four pigeons were trained on a multiple reinforcement schedule consisting of two limited-hold schedules, one in which a discriminative stimulus (S^D) accompanied the periodic reinforcement contingency, and one in which the discriminative stimulus was omitted. The duration of the limited-hold in each component of the multiple schedule was reduced in parallel steps. It was shown that behavioral differences between the two schedules were attenuated by this manipulation of temporal parameters. When S^D was reduced in duration, three out of four pigeons responded with extremely high S^Δ rates, despite the regular pairing of S^Δ with the reinforcement contingency. These high rates qualitatively resembled the rapid rates emitted on the analogous no-S^D component.     

Choice dynamics in concurrent ratio schedules of reinforcement

The generalized matching law predicts performance on concurrent schedules when variable-interval schedules are programmed but is trivially applicable when independent ratio schedules are used. Responding usually is exclusive to the schedule with the lowest response requirement. Determining a method to program concurrent ratio schedules such that matching analyses can be usefully employed would extend the generality of matching research and lead to new avenues of research. In the present experiments, ratio schedules were programmed dependently such that responses to either of the two options progressed the requirement on both schedules. Responding is not exclusive because the probability of reinforcement increases on both schedules as responses are allocated to either schedule. In Experiment 1, performance on concurrent variable-ratio schedules was assessed, and reinforcer ratios were varied across conditions to investigate changes in sensitivity. Additionally, the length of a changeover delay was manipulated. In Experiment 2, performance was compared under concurrently available, dependently programmed variable-ratio and fixed-ratio schedules. Performance was well described by the generalized matching law. Increases in the changeover delay decreased sensitivity, whereas sensitivity was higher when variable-ratio schedules were employed, compared with fixed-ratio schedules. Concurrent ratio schedules can be a viable approach to studying functional differences between ratio and interval schedules.     

Differential Transfer Benefits of Increased Practice for Constant,Blocked, and Serial Practice Schedules

The effects of practice schedule and amount of practice on the development of the generalized motor program (GMP) and on parameter estimation were investigated. Participants (N = 108) practiced the same relative timing but different absolute durations of a multisegment timing task. Practice schedules (constant, blocked, or serial) were crossed with amounts of practice (low and high). Inclusion of a constant practice condition allowed the authors to investigate the variability of practice prediction. Participants practiced the same proportional durations in a serial or a blocked schedule, which enabled the authors to examine contextual interference. A constant practice schedule enhanced GMP performance when task parameters remained the same, but varied practice schedules were beneficial when task parameters changed. A serial as opposed to a blocked practice schedule was superior when the performance of a task governed by a different GMP was required. Increased practice led to a consolidated task representation that was unavailable for updating.     

Preference for fixed-interval schedules: effects of initial-link length

Six homing pigeons were trained on a variety of concurrent-chains schedules in which the initial links were equal variable-interval schedules and the terminal links were fixed-interval schedules. Both terminal-link and initial-link schedules were systematically varied. The results showed that preference for a particular terminal-link schedule combination was greater, the shorter the initial-link schedules. The data closely matched predictions from the model of choice suggested by Davison and Temple (1973), but did not match predictions from two other models. An alternative method for analyzing concurrent-chains performance by assuming that the schedule consists of both chained schedules and successive, discriminated components that comprise multiple schedules, was suggested.