Separating the reinforcing and discriminative properties of brief-stimulus presentations in second-order schedules.

Pigeons' responses were maintained under multiple schedules to study properties of briefly presented stimuli. Responses in one component produced food according to a second-order schedule with fixed-interval components in which food or a brief stimulus occurred with equal probability. In the second component responses produced only the brief stimulus under a fixed-ratio schedule. Under various conditions the brief stimulus in the first component was (a) paired with food, (b) not paired with food, (c) partially omitted, or (d) scheduled simultaneously with the second-order schedule under an independent variable-interval schedule. Paired and nonpaired brief stimuli maintained similar response patterning in the second-order schedule. However, only paired stimuli maintained responses in the second component. The data suggest that nonpaired brief stimuli engender response patterning in second-order schedules as a result of their discriminative properties. When the stimulus is paired with food, these discriminative properties sometime mask a reinforcement effect, and no change in response patterning is observed. When the discriminative properties of the brief stimulus are absent, the reinforcing effects of pairing the brief stimulus with food may be observed.     

Brief-stimulus presentations on multiform tandem schedules

Three experiments examined the influence of a brief stimulus (a light) on the behavior of food-deprived rats whose lever pressing on tandem schedules comprising components of different schedule types resulted in food presentation. In Experiment 1, either a tandem variable-ratio variable-interval or a tandem variable-interval variable-ratio schedule was used. The variable-interval requirement in the tandem variable-ratio variable-interval schedule was yoked to the time taken to complete the variable-ratio component in the tandem variable-interval variable-ratio schedule, and the length of the variable-interval component in the latter schedule was yoked to the variable-ratio component in the former schedule. If a brief stimulus occurred following completion of the first component, then behavior was differentiated in the two components; subjects responded more quickly in the variable-ratio than in the variable-interval component. If the stimulus was removed, then response rate was determined by the nature of the final component. Similar results were obtained in Experiments 2 and 3 with the use of a three-component tandem variable-ratio variable-interval variable-ratio schedule or tandem variable-interval variable-ratio variable-interval schedule. Thus, a brief stimulus that was not explicitly paired with reinforcement engendered behavior typical of the component schedule preceding its presentation.     

Fixed versus variable sequences of food and stimulus presentation in second-order schedules

Three pigeons were exposed to a second-order schedule in which the behavior specified by a fixed-interval component schedule was reinforced according to a ratio overall schedule. The completion of components not followed by food was signalled by a brief stimulus never paired with food. Food and the stimulus occurred in a random sequence or in fixed alternation, but the overall schedules (variable ratio 2 or fixed ratio 2) ensured that an equal number of food and brief-stimulus presentations occurred in each session. The control exerted by the food and by the brief stimulus was measured by overall response rates, mean pauses, frequency distributions of pauses, and response patterning across components. In general, the stimulus controlled patterns of behavior more similar to those controlled by food when food and the stimulus occurred in a random sequence than when they occurred in fixed alternation.     

Discriminative properties of briefly presented stimuli

In Experiment I, pigeons' responses produced food according to a fixed-interval schedule while responses on the key also produced brief stimuli according to a variable-interval schedule. Each brief stimulus reset the fixed interval. Thus, a brief stimulus occurred irregularly but a fixed minimum time separated the occurrence of food from a brief stimulus. Pauses followed brief stimuli and were followed by an accelerated response rate until another brief stimulus or food occurred. In Experiment II, four control procedures were examined. (1) Brief-stimulus presentations were omitted, producing a loss of response patterning. (2) A second-order schedule was studied with fixed-interval components. This schedule produced patterning following brief stimuli similar in kind and degree to that found in Experiment I. (3) A conjoint schedule was arranged in which food was no longer separated from the stimulus by a fixed time; pauses following the stimulus no longer resulted. (4) A brief food reinforcer replaced the brief visual stimulus, resulting in a constant response rate with no pausing following the brief food stimulus. The results suggest that the brief-stimulus effects were due to discriminative functions produced by the fixed temporal relation separating the stimulus from food.     

Discriminative functions of schedule stimuli and memory: a combination of schedule and choice procedures

Pigeons responded under a combination brief-stimulus schedule and choice procedure. Normally, a fixed-interval schedule was in effect, where completion randomly produced either a brief stimulus or food. Intermittently, this schedule was interrupted by a choice arrangement. Two choice keys were lit, either a short or a long time since a prior event (food or stimulus). One choice response produced food if the time had been short, and the alternate response produced food if the time had been long. Across conditions, the duration of the fixed-interval schedule was varied, the stimuli that comprised the brief-stimulus operation were changed, and the stimuli were presented as paired and nonpaired with food. The focus of the study was the control of both schedule performance and choice responding across conditions. The results showed that choice accuracy was correlated with the degree of fixed-interval curvature, the response pattern of a pause followed by a gradually accelerated rate. As fixed-interval schedule duration was increased, both the degree of fixed-interval curvature and choice accuracy decreased. The particular brief stimulus used affected schedule and choice performance, with a more salient stimulus producing a greater degree of curvature and higher accuracy. Pairing and nonpairing operations produced striking differences in performance with the less salient brief stimulus, but not with the more salient stimulus. The results suggest that brief-stimulus schedule performance may be conceptualized in the context of memory research.     

Conditioned reinforcement and discrimination in second-order schedules

Pigeons were exposed to multiple second-order schedules in which responding on the “main key” was reinforced according to either a variable-interval or fixed-interval schedule by production of a brief stimulus on the “brief-stimulus key”. A response was required to the brief stimulus during its fourth (final) presentation to produce food; responses to the earlier brief stimuli indicated the extent to which the final brief stimulus was discriminated from preceding ones. Main-key response rates were higher in early components of paired brief-stimulus schedules, in which each brief stimulus was the same as that paired with reinforcement, than in comparable unpaired brief-stimulus or tandem schedules. Poor discrimination occurred between paired brief stimuli (Experiment I). When chain stimuli on the main key induced a discrimination between the first two and second two brief stimuli, the response-rate enhancement in the paired brief-stimulus schedule persisted (Experiment II). Rate enhancement diminished when the initial link of the chain included the first three components (Experiment IV). Eliminating the contingency between responding and brief-stimulus production also diminished rate enhancement (Experiment III). The results show that the discriminative and conditioned reinforcing effects of food-paired brief stimuli may be selectively manipulated and suggest that the reinforcing effects are modulated by other reinforcers in the situation.     

Behavior of rats under fixed consecutive number schedules: effects of drugs of abuse.

Four rats responded under a simple fixed consecutive number schedule in which eight or more consecutive responses on the run lever, followed by a single response on the reinforcement lever, produced the food reinforcer. Under this simple schedule, dose-response curves were determined for diazepam, morphine, pentobarbital, and phencyclidine. The rats were then trained to respond under a multiple fixed consecutive number schedule in which a discriminative stimulus signaled when the response requirement on the run lever had been completed in one of the two fixed consecutive number component schedules. Under control conditions, the percentage of reinforced runs under the multiple-schedule component with the discriminative stimulus added was much higher than the percentage of reinforced runs under the multiple-schedule component without the discriminative stimulus. All of the drugs decreased the percentage of reinforced runs under each of the fixed consecutive number schedules by increasing the conditional probability of short run lengths. This effect was most consistently produced by morphine. The drugs produced few differences in responding between the multiple fixed consecutive number components. Responding under the simple fixed consecutive number schedule, however, was affected at lower doses of the drugs than was responding under the same fixed consecutive number schedule when it was a component of the multiple schedule. This result may be due to the difference in schedule context or, perhaps, to the order of the experiments.     

Multiple schedules in practical application: Research trends and implications for future investigation

Researchers began studying multiple schedules in basic laboratories, but recent advances have extended research on multiple schedules to a wide variety of socially significant applications, especially during the last decade. Applied researchers have used multiple schedules to (a) promote stimulus control over high‐rate appropriate behaviors, (b) thin the schedule of reinforcement following functional communication training, and (c) obtain stimulus control over problem behaviors maintained by automatic reinforcement. In the current paper, we reviewed 31 studies with 147 applications identified through a search of the applied literature on multiple schedules. Using these studies, we (a) reviewed the empirical literature on multiple schedules, (b) recommended multiple‐schedule procedures that serve as best practice guidelines for applied behavior analysts, (c) identified the generality and boundaries of current knowledge about the effectiveness of multiple schedules, and (d) critically analyzed the literature to provide directions for future multiple‐schedule research.     

Second-order schedules with paired auditory brief stimuli

Pigeons were exposed to multiple second-order schedules of paired and unpaired brief stimuli in which responding on the main key was reinforced according to a fixed-interval thirty-second schedule by a brief stimulus (a tone in the paired schedule) and advancement to the next segment of the second-order schedule. In Experiment 1, a response on the second key was required during the tone in its fourth and final presentation to produce food. Responses during earlier brief stimuli indicated the extent to which the final brief stimulus was discriminated from preceding ones. Responding was comparable during all tones, extending prior findings with visual paired brief stimuli and weakening explanations of subjects' failure to discriminate between brief-stimulus presentations in terms of elicited responding. In Experiment 2 the number of fixed-interval segments comprising the second-order schedules varied from one through eight. Although main-key response rates increased across segments in both experiments, they increased much less sharply with a variable number of segments. These results suggest that the increase in main-key response rates across segments is due primarily to a degree of temporal discrimination not reflected on the second key. Main-key response rates were higher on paired auditory brief-stimulus schedules than on unpaired visual brief-stimulus schedules, especially in Experiment 2, thus further extending findings with visual brief stimuli to second-order schedules with auditory brief stimuli.     

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.     

Stimulus properties of conspecific behavior

Two experiments identified the conditions in which the behavior of one bird acquired discriminative control of the behavior of a second bird. The schedule-controlled behaviors of the “stimulus” bird were differentially correlated with the components of a multiple schedule according to which the pecking of an “experimental” bird produced food. In Experiment 1, three pairs of pigeons acquired a successive discrimination and two reversals with the conspecific stimuli. Experiment 2 included a control condition in which no systematic relationship existed between the conspecific stimuli and the component schedules. While differential responding during the components of the multiple schedule was again found when the conspecific stimuli were available, differential responding did not occur in the control condition. Test conditions included in the experiments indicated that (a) the differential responding was not dependent on the discriminative properties of reinforcement, (b) the pecking of the stimulus and experimental birds was temporally interrelated, (c) the visual conspecific stimuli were critical to the maintenance of the discrimination, and (d) the observed stimulus control immediately generalized to an unfamiliar conspecific.     

Second-order schedules: discrimination of components

Pigeons were exposed to a series of second-order schedules in which the completion of a fixed number of fixed-interval components produced food. In Experiment 1, brief (2 sec) stimulus presentations occurred as each fixed-interval component was completed. During the brief-stimulus presentation terminating the last fixed-interval component, a response was required on a second key, the brief-stimulus key, to produce food. Responses on the brief-stimulus key before the last brief-stimulus presentation had no scheduled consequences, but served as a measure of the extent to which the final component was discriminated from preceding components. Whether there were one, two, four, or eight fixed-interval components, responses on the brief-stimulus key occurred during virtually every brief-stimulus presentation. In Experiment 2, an attempt was made to punish unnecessary responses on the brief-stimulus key, i.e., responses on the brief-stimulus key that occurred before the last component. None of the pigeons learned to withhold these responses, even though they produced a 15-sec timeout and loss of primary reinforcement. In Experiment 3, different key colors were associated with each component of a second-order schedule (a chain schedule). In contrast to Experiment 1, brief-stimulus key responses were confined to the last component. It was concluded that pigeons do not discriminate well between components of second-order schedules unless a unique exteroceptive cue is provided for each component. The relative discriminability of the components may account for the observed differences in initial-component response rates between comparable brief-stimulus, tandem, and chain schedules.     

Concurrent second-order schedules of reinforcement

Responses on one key (the main key) of a two-key chamber produced food according to a second-order variable-interval schedule with fixed-interval schedule components. A response on a second key (the changeover key) alternated colors on the main key and provided a second independent second-order variable-interval schedule with fixed-interval components. The fixed-interval component on one variable-interval schedule was held constant at 8 sec, while the fixed interval on the other variable-interval schedule was varied from 0 to 32 sec. Under some conditions, a brief stimulus terminated each fixed interval and generated fixed-interval patterns; in other conditions, the brief stimulus was omitted. Relative response rate and relative time deviated substantially from scheduled relative reinforcement rate and, to a lesser extent, from obtained relative reinforcement rate under both brief-stimulus and no-stimulus conditions. Matching was observed with equal components on both schedules; with unequal components, increasingly greater proportions of time and responses than the matching relation would predict were spent on the variable-interval schedule containing the shorter component. Preference for the shorter fixed interval was typically more extreme under brief-stimulus than under no-stimulus schedules. The results limit the extension of the matching relation typically observed under simple concurrent variable-interval schedules to concurrent second-order variable-interval schedules.     

Effects of conditioned reinforcement frequency in an intermittent free-feeding situation,

Key-pecking intermittently produced a set of brief exteroceptive stimulus changes under two-component multiple schedules of conditioned reinforcement. Throughout the study, free access to grain was concurrently provided on an intermittent basis via a variable-interval tape. Free food presentations scheduled by the tape were delivered if no peck had been emitted for 6 sec, and the brief stimulus changes produced by responding under the multiple schedules were those which accompanied food presentation. The second component of each multiple schedule was always associated with a 1-min, variable-interval schedule of conditioned reinforcement. The schedule associated with the first component was systematically varied and conditioned reinforcement was either absent (extinction) or programmed on a 1-, 3-, 6-, or 12-min variable-interval schedule. Under these conditions, rate of responding in the manipulated component decreased monotonically with a decrease in the frequency of conditioned reinforcement. In addition, contrast effects were often obtained in the constant, second component. These results are similar to those obtained with similar multiple schedules of primary reinforcement.     

Effects on responding of mixed and multiple schedules of signalled and unsignalled response-dependent electric-shock delivery

Responding in two rats was maintained under mixed and multiple variable-interval 35-sec variable-interval 35-sec food delivery schedules. Similar rates and patterns of responding occurred in each component of the two schedules. Mixed and multiple variable-interval 65-sec variable-interval 65-sec schedules of response-dependent shock delivery were super-imposed on the mixed and multiple baseline food schedules, respectively. In one component, a 5-sec stimulus was presented on the average of once every 65 sec. Offset of the stimulus arranged that the next response would produce shock. In the other component, no stimulus was presented during the 5-sec period. The mixed schedule of signalled and unsignalled dependent shock delivery yielded similar degrees of response suppression in each component, but the multiple schedule of shock delivery revealed differential degrees of response suppression. Considerably more suppression occurred in the component not associated with the preshock stimulus, thus implicating the discriminative functions of the correlated stimulus.     

Polydipsia induced in rats by second-order schedules of reinforcement.

Three rats were exposed to a second-order schedule in which fixed-interval components ended either with food or with a brief stimulus that was never paired with food. Food and the brief stimulus occurred in a random sequence (variable-ratio 2 overall schedule). Another three rats were exposed to a similar second-order schedule, the only difference being that the food or the stimulus was presented independently of operant behavior (fixed-time components). The three rats exposed to the fixed-interval components licked at a water spout after each food presentation. These rats also licked in the intervals after the brief stimulus. Although the discriminative properties of food and of the brief stimulus were identical in relation to subsequent reinforcement, licking after the stimulus was less than after food. The three rats exposed to the second-order schedules with fixed-time components also licked at the water spout after food, but these rats did not lick consistently after brief stimulus presentations.     

The roles of stimulus control and reinforcement frequency in modulating the behavioral effects of d-amphetamine in the rat.

The behavioral effects of d-amphetamine have been shown to be modulated by stimulus control, with less impairment of performance occurring when control is great. When the fixed-consecutive-number schedule is used (on which at least a specified consecutive number of responses must be made on one operandum before a single response on another will produce a reinforcer), response rate tends to be invariant but reinforcement frequency is not. This study asks whether the differences in reinforcement frequency that usually accompany changes in stimulus control could themselves be responsible for the performance differences. Two versions of the fixed-consecutive-number schedule of reinforcement were combined into a multiple schedule within which stimulus control was varied but differences in reinforcement frequency were minimized by omitting some reinforcer deliveries during the component that usually had the higher reinforcement frequency. In one component, a compound discriminative stimulus was added with the eighth consecutive response on the first lever; a single response on the second lever was then reinforced. In the other component, no such stimulus was presented. With no added stimulus, large decreases occurred in the number of runs satisfying the minimum requirement for reinforcement at doses of drug that produced only minimal changes when an added stimulus controlled behavior. Thus, increased stimulus control diminishes the behavioral changes produced by d-amphetamine even when the possible contribution by baseline reinforcement rate is minimized.     

DISCRIMINATION OF VARIABLE SCHEDULES IS CONTROLLED BY INTERRESPONSE TIMES PROXIMAL TO REINFORCEMENT

In Experiment 1, food‐deprived rats responded to one of two schedules that were, with equal probability, associated with a sample lever. One schedule was always variable ratio, while the other schedule, depending on the trial within a session, was: (a) a variable‐interval schedule; (b) a tandem variable‐interval, differential‐reinforcement‐of‐low‐rate schedule; or (c) a tandem variable‐interval, differential‐reinforcement‐of‐high‐rate schedule. Completion of a sample‐lever schedule, which took approximately the same time regardless of schedule, presented two comparison levers, one associated with each sample‐lever schedule. Pressing the comparison lever associated with the schedule just presented produced food, while pressing the other produced a blackout. Conditional‐discrimination accuracy was related to the size of the difference in reinforced interresponse times and those that preceded it (predecessor interresponse times) between the variable‐ratio and other comparison schedules. In Experiment 2, control by predecessor interresponse times was accentuated by requiring rats to discriminate between a variable‐ratio schedule and a tandem schedule that required emission of a sequence of a long, then a short interresponse time in the tandem's terminal schedule. These discrimination data are compatible with the copyist model from Tanno and Silberberg (2012) in which response rates are determined by the succession of interresponse times between reinforcers weighted so that each interresponse time's role in rate determination diminishes exponentially as a function of its distance from reinforcement.     

Observing behavior in squirrel monkeys under a multiple schedule of reinforcement availability

Observing behavior of two squirrel monkeys was examined under a multiple schedule of four components. Lever (observing) responses produced either a stimulus indicating the availability of food or another stimulus indicating food was not available. Key responses in the presence of the food-available stimulus produced food on a continuous reinforcement schedule. In the absence of food-available stimuli, responding on the key had no scheduled consequences. Observing responses produced food-available stimuli according to three different random-interval schedules with mean interstimulus availability times of 1, 2, and 4 min. In the fourth component of the multiple schedule (observing extinction) food-available stimuli never occurred. Each component of the schedule was correlated with a distinctive auditory stimulus. Observing rates decreased with decreasing frequency of the food-available stimulus. Observing rates during extinction continued decreasing when the brief stimulus indicating food unavailability was no longer produced by lever pressing. When the brief stimulus was reinstated response rates increased abruptly.     

Schedules of response-independent conditioned reinforcement

Rates and patterns of responding of pigeons under response-independent and response-dependent schedules of brief-stimulus presentation were compared by superimposing 3-min brief-stimulus schedules on a 15-min fixed-interval schedule of food presentation. The brief-stimulus schedules were fixed time, fixed interval, variable time, and variable interval. When the brief stimulus was paired with food presentation, its effects depended upon the schedule and ongoing rates. Fixed- and variable-interval brief-stimulus schedules enhanced the low rates normally occurring early in the 15-min interval, whereas fixed- and variable-time schedules suppressed these rates. Although the overall rates later in the interval were not affected to any great extent, the fixed brief-stimulus schedules generated patterns of positively accelerated responding between stimulus presentations. These patterns appeared less frequently under the variable brief-stimulus schedules. Initially, when not paired with food delivery, presentations of the brief stimulus produced relatively little effect on either response rate or patterning. However, once the stimulus had accompanied food presentation, the original performance under the nonpaired condition was not recovered. The effects were more like those occurring when the stimulus was paired with food.