Stimulus control of avoidance behavior

The introduction of a warning signal preceding shocks greatly increased the effectiveness of avoidance responding. Periods of “warm-up” at the beginning of the session were eliminated, and the number of shocks received by the subjects was greatly reduced. With response-shock interval constant, response rate increased as the interval between the response and the onset of the warning signal was shortened. The response tended to occur shortly after the onset of the warning signal regardless of the duration of these “safe” periods. A greatly elevated response rate was maintained even when the duration of the safe period was reduced to 0.3 sec. Thus, the pre-shock signal obtained nearly exclusive control of the responding and overrode the usual “temporal discrimination” of the response-shock interval.     

Stimulus control of self-destructive behavior in a psychotic child

This study attempted to isolate some of the stimulus variables that controlled the self-destructive behavior of a psychotic child. In Experiment 1, the child was exposed to several demand and nondemand situations. In Experiment 2, the situation containing demands was modified so that demands now occurred in the context of a positive, ongoing interaction between the child and the adult therapist. The rates of self-destructive behavior underwent several orderly changes: (1) Rates were high in demand situations and low in nondemand and modified-demand situations; (2) rates decreased sharply when a stimulus correlated with the termination of demands was introduced; and (3) rates of self-destruction typically showed gradual increases within each of those sessions which contained only demands. These results were interpreted as suggesting that (1) self-destruction, under certain circumstances, may be conceptualized as an escape response which is negatively reinforced by the termination of a demand situation and (2) certain modifications of the social environment may provide discriminative stimuli for behaviors other than self-destruction, thereby decreasing this behavior.This investigation was supported in part by USPHS Research Grant 11440 from the National Institute of Mental Health. The research was conducted while the first author held a postdoctoral fellowship from the Medical Research Council of Canada. The authors thank Jon and Lynn Killion and Dennis Russo for their help in data collection and Ivar Lovaas, Laura Schreibman, and Robert Koegel for their many helpful criticisms. The encouragement and support of Tim's parents during the course of this study are sincerely appreciated.     

Stimulus control of spatial behavior on the eight-arm maze in rats

Rats were trained on an eight-arm, elevated radial maze in a large cylindrical chamber where extramaze stimuli could be manipulated. The first experiment indicated that rats could use extramaze stimuli to locate the arms if such stimuli were available, whereas they performed less effectively and tended to employ response chaining if these stimuli were not available. The second experiment demonstrated that maze performance was disrupted by transposition of the stimuli but was relatively unaffected by rotation of the same stimuli. The third experiment suggested that the disruptive effect of stimulus transposition might be due to a “resetting” process elicited by the alteration in the configuration of the stimuli after stimulus transposition. These results suggest that when extramaze stimuli are available, rats tend to use such stimuli in a configurational manner to locate the arms rather than as a list of items processed independently of their spatial relationships to each other.     

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.     

Stimulus control of cocaine self-administration

Environmental stimuli that set the occasion wherein drugs are acquired can "trigger" drug-related behavior. Investigating the stimulus control of drug self-administration in laboratory animals should help us better understand this aspect of human drug abuse. Stimulus control of cocaine self-administration was generated here for the first time using multiple and chained schedules with short, frequently-alternating components--like those typically used to study food-maintained responding. The procedures and results are presented along with case histories to illustrate the strategies used to produce this stimulus control. All these multicomponent schedules contained variable-interval (VI) components as well as differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (DRO) or extinction components. Schedule parameters and unit dose were adjusted for each rat to produce stable, moderate rates in VI components, with minimal postreinforcement (infusion) pausing, and response cessation in extinction and DRO components. Whole-body drug levels on terminal baselines calculated retrospectively revealed that all rats maintained fairly stable drug levels (mean, 2.3 to 3.4 mg/kg) and molar rates of intake (approximately 6.0 mg/kg/hr). Within this range, no relation between local VI response rates and drug level was found. The stimulus control revealed in cumulative records was indistinguishable from that achieved with food under these schedules, suggesting that common mechanisms may underlie the control of cocaine- and food-maintained behavior.     

Stimulus control of Pavlovian facilitation

Two experiments were conducted using an autoshaping procedure with pigeons to examine whether dimensional stimulus control by a Pavlovian facilitator parallels the control established following operant discrimination training. Facilitation training consisted of the presentation of a black vertical line on a white background as the B stimulus in a feature-positive discrimination in which the A stimulus (white keylight) was followed by grain presentation only if preceded by B. In this way, B facilitates or sets the occasion for pecking at A. Subsequent testing for generalization along the line-orientation dimension produced decremental gradients when the facilitation paradigm incorporated an explicit feature-negative stimulus (B−). These results parallel the decremental control obtained following operant discrimination training and suggest that Pavlovian facilitators and instrumental discriminative stimuli are functionally equivalent.     

Stimulus control of differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate responding

Five pigeons were given single-stimulus training on an 8-sec differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule followed by steady-state generalization training using 12 wavelength stimuli. Three birds had a high percentage of reinforced responses on the training schedule and flat generalization gradients of total responses. The birds with fewer reinforced responses had much steeper generalization gradients. Generalization gradients plotted as a function of both stimulus wavelength and interresponse time showed that for most birds, stimulus control was restricted to responses with long interresponse times. Responses with very short interresponse times were not under stimulus control and there was some evidence of inhibitory control of short interresponse times. Interresponse-times-per-opportunity functions, plotted as a function of stimulus wavelength, showed that stimulus wavelength controlled the temporal distribution of responses, rather than the overall rate of response. The data indicate that the differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule generates several response categories that are controlled in different ways by wavelength and time-correlated stimuli, and that averaging responses regardless of interresponse-time length obscures this control.     

Stimulus control during conditional discrimination

Pigeons were used to assess stimulus control during the development of a conditional discrimination. The training consisted of three stages. In Stage 1, key pecks were reinforced in the presence of a white line tilted 40 degrees to the right of vertical on a green background and non-reinforced when the same line appeared on a red background. In Stage 2, key pecks were reinforced when a white vertical line appeared on a red background and were non-reinforced in the presence of a 40 degrees slanted line on a red background. In Stage 3, key pecks were reinforced in the presence of the green background regardless of the line tilt, but were differentially reinforced in the presence of the red background (as in Stage 2). Generalization tests were conducted after each stage of training and consisted of five white lines on backgrounds that were green, red, or dark. The effects of the differential reinforcement contingencies on control by line orientation were restricted to the condition in which the red light appeared and resulted in behavioral control that could be characterized as: if red, pay closer attention to line tilt than if not red.     

Stimulus control: part I

In his effort to distinguish operant from respondent conditioning, Skinner stressed the lack of an eliciting stimulus and rejected the prevailing stereotype of Pavlovian "stimulus-response" psychology. But control by antecedent stimuli, whether classified as conditional or discriminative, is ubiquitous in the natural setting. With both respondent and operant behavior, symmetrical gradients of generalization along unrelated dimensions may be obtained following differential reinforcement in the presence and the absence of the stimulus. The slopes of these gradients serve as measures of stimulus control, and they can be steepened without applying differential reinforcement to any two points along the test dimension. Increases and decreases in stimulus control occur under the same conditions as those leading to increases and decreases in observing responses, indicating that it is the increasing frequency and duration of observation (and perhaps also of attention) that produces the separation in performances during discrimination learning.     

Stimulus control with fixed-ratio reinforcement

Pigeons were trained on a three-stimulus simultaneous discrimination with reinforcements given on fixed-ratio schedules ranging from one response per reinforcement to 205 responses per reinforcement. Responses to any of the three stimuli advanced the ratio, but, when it was completed, a reinforcement followed a response to one designated stimulus. Throughout the ratio, the birds responded mainly to the designated stimulus. The relatively few responses to the other stimuli usually occurred immediately after postreinforcement pauses. The distribution of responses to the various stimuli was not affected by omitting reinforcements.     

Stimulus control: part II

The second part of my tutorial stresses the systematic importance of two parameters of discrimination training: (a) the magnitude of the physical difference between the positive and the negative stimulus (disparity) and (b) the magnitude of the difference between the positive stimulus, in particular, and the background stimulation (salience). It then examines the role these variables play in such complex phenomena as blocking and overshadowing, progressive discrimination training, and the transfer of control by fading. It concludes by considering concept formation and imitation, which are important forms of application, and recent work on equivalence relations.     

Stimulus control and delayed reinforcement

Pigeons were tested for generalization along the line-orientation dimension, after being trained on various two-component multiple schedules. The first component contained either a variable-interval 1-min schedule of immediate reinforcement or an extinction schedule and was associated with a plain white key (S1). The second component contained a variable-interval 1-min schedule of delayed reinforcement and was associated with a black line on a white background (S2). The major results showed that (a) decremental gradients were obtained around the stimulus associated with the delayed reinforcement component when S1 was associated with extinction, but that incremental gradients were obtained when S1 was associated with immediate reinforcement, (b) the subjects' pretraining did not affect the generalization gradients if sufficient training on the terminal multiple schedule was provided, and (c) changing the S1 schedule from immediate reinforcement to extinction produced behavioral contrast if reinforcement was delayed for 10 sec during S2, but not if it was delayed for 20 sec.     

Stimulus control of behavioral history.

Pigeons were exposed to two different reinforcement schedules under different stimulus conditions in each of two daily sessions separated by 6 hr (Experiments 1 and 2) or in a single session (Experiment 3). Following this, either a fixed-interval (Experiment 1) or a variable-interval schedule (Experiments 2 and 3) was effected in both stimulus conditions. In the first two experiments, exposure to fixed-ratio or differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedules led to response-rate, but not pattern, differences in subsequent performance on fixed- or variable-interval schedules that persisted for up to 60 sessions. The effects of reinforcement-schedule history on fixed-interval schedule performance generally were more persistent. In Experiment 3, a history of high and low response rates in different components of a multiple schedule resulted in subsequent response-rate differences under identical variable-interval schedules. Higher response rates initially occurred in the component previously correlated with high response rates. For 3 of 4 subjects, the differences persisted for 20 or more sessions. Previous demonstrations of behavioral history effects have been confined largely to between-subject comparisons. By contrast, the present results demonstrate strong behavioral effects of schedule histories under stimulus control within individual subjects.     

Stimulus control and the response-reinforcement contingency

Pigeons were trained under a schedule in which reinforcement was made available at varying periods of time after a prior reinforcement. The first key peck after a reinforcer was available began a timer and a second key peck, which exceeded a specified minimal time interval, produced the reinforcer. It was shown that a contingency which contains a minimal interresponse time does not necessarily weaken stimulus control by an exteroceptive stimulus.