Rats' performance on variable-interval schedules with a linear feedback loop between response rate and reinforcement rate

Three experiments investigated whether rats are sensitive to the molar properties of a variable-interval (VI) schedule with a positive relation between response rate and reinforcement rate (i.e., a VI+ schedule). In Experiment 1, rats responded faster on a variable ratio (VR) schedule than on a VI+ schedule with an equivalent feedback function. Reinforced interresponse times (IRTs) were shorter on the VR as compared to the VI+ schedule. In Experiments 2 and 3, there was no systematic difference in response rates maintained by a VI+ schedule and a VI schedule yoked in terms of reinforcement rate. This was found both when the yoking procedure was between-subject (Experiment 2) and within-subject (Experiment 3). Mean reinforced IRTs were similar on both the VI+ and yoked VI schedules, but these values were more variable on the VI+ schedule. These results provided no evidence that rats are sensitive to the feedback function relating response rate to reinforcement rate on a VI+ schedule.     

Cooperative responding in rats maintained by fixed‐ and variable‐ratio schedules

The present study investigated the effects of fixed‐ratio (FR) and variable‐ratio (VR) reinforcement schedules on patterns of cooperative responding in pairs of rats. Experiment 1 arranged FR 1, FR 10, and VR 10 schedules to establish cooperative responding (water delivery depended on the joint responding of two rats). Cooperative response rates and proportions were higher under intermittent schedules than under continuous reinforcement. The FR 10 schedule generated a break‐and‐run pattern, whereas the VR 10 schedule generated a relatively high and constant rate pattern. Experiment 2 evaluated the effects of parametric manipulations of FR and VR schedules on cooperative responding. Rates and proportions of cooperative responding generally increased between ratio sizes of 1 and 5 but showed no consistent trend as the ratio increased from 5 to 10. Experiment 3 contrasted cooperative responding between an FR6 schedule and a yoked control schedule. Coordinated behavior occurred at a higher rate under the former schedule. The present study showed that external consequences and the schedules under which the delivery of these consequences are based, select patterns of coordinated behavior.     

Free-operant performance on variable interval schedules with a linear feedback loop: no evidence for molar sensitivities in rats

Four experiments examined rats' sensitivity to molar and molecular factors on instrumental schedules of reinforcement. Rats were exposed to a variable interval schedule with a positive feedback loop (VI+), such that faster responding led to a shorter interreinforcement interval. In Experiments 1 and 2, rats responded faster on a variable response (VR) schedule than on either a VI schedule matched for reinforcement rate or a VI+ schedule matched for the feedback function. In Experiment 3, rats responded no differently on a VI schedule than they did on a VI+ schedule with equated rates of reinforcement. In Experiment 4, rats responded faster on a VI+ schedule with an interresponse time requirement yoked to that experienced on a VR schedule, than on a VI+ schedule with the same feedback function as the VR schedule. Taken together these results suggest that rats are more sensitive to the molecular than the molar properties of the schedules.     

Baseline response rates affect resistance to change

The effect of response rates on resistance to change, measured as resistance to extinction, was examined in two experiments. In Experiment 1, responding in transition from a variable‐ratio schedule and its yoked‐interval counterpart to extinction was compared with pigeons. Following training on a multiple variable‐ratio yoked‐interval schedule of reinforcement, in which response rates were higher in the former component, reinforcement was removed from both components during a single extended extinction session. Resistance to extinction in the yoked‐interval component was always either greater or equal to that in the variable‐ratio component. In Experiment 2, resistance to extinction was compared for two groups of rats that exhibited either high or low response rates when maintained on identical variable‐interval schedules. Resistance to extinction was greater for the lower‐response‐rate group. These results suggest that baseline response rate can contribute to resistance to change. Such effects, however, can only be revealed when baseline response rate and reinforcement rate are disentangled (Experiments 1 and 2) from the more usual circumstance where the two covary. Furthermore, they are more cleanly revealed when the programmed contingencies controlling high and low response rates are identical, as in Experiment 2.     

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.     

Response-rate differences in variable-interval and variable-ratio schedules: An old problem revisited

In Experiment 1, a variable-ratio 10 schedule became, successively, a variable-interval schedule with only the minimum interreinforcement intervals yoked to the variable ratio, or a variable-interval schedule with both interreinforcement intervals and reinforced interresponse times yoked to the variable ratio. Response rates in the variable-interval schedule with both interreinforcement interval and reinforced interresponse time yoking fell between the higher rates maintained by the variable-ratio schedule and the lower rates maintained by the variable-interval schedule with only interreinforcement interval yoking. In Experiment 2, a tandem variable-interval 15-s variable-ratio 5 schedule became a yoked tandem variable-ratio 5 variable-interval x-s schedule, and a tandem variable-interval 30-s variable-ratio 10 schedule became a yoked tandem variable-ratio 10 variable-interval x-s schedule. In the yoked tandem schedules, the minimum interreinforcement intervals in the variable-interval components were those that equated overall interreinforcement times in the two phases. Response rates did not decline in the yoked schedules even when the reinforced interresponse times became longer. Experiment 1 suggests that both reinforced interresponse times and response rate–reinforcement rate correlations determine response-rate differences in variable-ratio 10 and yoked variable-interval schedules in rats. Experiment 2 suggests a minimal role for the reinforced interresponse time in determining response rates on tandem variable-interval 30-s variable-ratio 10 and yoked tandem variable-ratio 10 variable-interval x-s schedules in rats.     

Instrumental performance on negative schedules

Three experiments examined the performance of rats pressing a lever for food reinforcement on a schedule in which high rates of response resulted in lowered rates of reinforcement (i.e. a schedule with a negative component). In Experiment 1, rats responded on a variable interval (VI) schedule with a conjoint component such that every 30 responses a reinforcement programmed by the VI schedule was cancelled. These subjects generally emitted a lower response rate than rats responding on a VI schedule yoked to the former subjects with respect to the delivery of reinforcement, although response rate differences were sometimes not large. Similar response-rate effects were obtained in Experiment 2 using a within-subject yoking procedure. In Experiment 3, reinforced interresponse times were matched on negative and VI schedules yoked in terms of reinforcement rate, and the response rate emitted in these conditions were similar. These results give support to theories of instrumental conditioning that stress the strengthening and shaping properties of reinforcement.     

Induced attack during fixed-ratio and matched-time schedules of food presentation

Adjunctive or induced behavior is generated during a variety of schedules of reinforcement. Several theoretical conceptualizations suggest that rate of reinforcement is the primary variable controlling the strength or levels of induced behavior. The operant response requirement within the schedule context has not been extensively studied as a determinant of induced responding. In the present study, levels of induced attack by food-deprived pigeons against restrained conspecifics were compared during response-dependent and response-independent schedules of food presentation equated or yoked interval-by-interval for reinforcement frequency. Experiment 1 compared levels of attack induced by fixed-ratio schedules of key pecking and yoked "matched-time" schedules. Experiment 2 similarly compared chained fixed-ratio 1 fixed-ratio 74 and yoked chained matched-time matched-time schedules. In both experiments, the response-dependent schedules generated greater levels (amount and probability) of induced attack than the response-independent time-based schedules. Thus, the ratio response requirement may be an important determinant of levels of induced responding, and the lower levels of attack observed during the response-independent condition may not be due to the absence of stimuli predicting food presentations. It is concluded that rate of reinforcement is not the sole variable determining levels of induced responding and that response-based and time-based schedules differ in their generation of induced responding.     

Control rate of response or reinforcement and amphetamine's effect on behavior.

The roles of control response rate and reinforcement frequency in producing amphetamine's effect on operant behavior were evaluated independently in rats. Two multiple schedules were arranged in which one variable, either response rate or reinforcement frequency, was held constant and the other variable manipulated. A multiple differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate seven-second yoked variable-interval schedule was used to equate reinforcement frequencies at different control response rates between multiple-schedule components. Amphetamine increased responding under the variable-interval component. In contrast, amphetamine decreased responding equivalently between components of a multiple random-ratio schedule that produced similar control response rates at different reinforcement frequencies. The results provide experimental support to the rate-dependency principle that control rate of responding is an important determinant of amphetamine's effect on operant behavior.     

Variable-time reinforcement schedules in the treatment of socially maintained problem behavior

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) consists of delivering a reinforcer on a time-based schedule, independent of responding. Studies evaluating the effectiveness of NCR as treatment for problem behavior have used fixed-time (FT) schedules of reinforcement. In this study, the efficacy of NCR with variable-time (VT) schedules was evaluated by comparing the effects of VT and FT reinforcement schedules with 2 individuals who engaged in problem behavior maintained by positive reinforcement. Both FT and VT schedules were effective in reducing problem behavior. These findings suggest that VT schedules can be used to treat problem behavior maintained by social consequences.     

The reductive effects of noncontingent reinforcement fixed-time versus variable-time schedules.

The effects of fixed‐time (FT) and variable‐time (VT) schedules on responding were evaluated with 2 adults with mental retardation. Multielement and reversal designs were used to compare the effects of FT and VT schedules in reducing responses previously maintained on variable‐ratio reinforcement schedules. The schedules were equally effective in reducing the target behavior.     

Schedules of reinforcement as determinants of human causality judgments and response rates

Experiments examined the effect of relationships between a response and an outcome on human judgments of causal effectiveness. In Experiment 1, the time between outcomes obtained on a variable ratio (VR) schedule became the intervals for a yoked variable interval (VI) schedule. Response rates were higher on the VR than on the VI schedule. In Experiment 2, the number of responses required per outcome on a VR schedule were matched to that on a master VI 20-s schedule. Both ratings of causal effectiveness and response rates were higher in the VR schedule. In Experiment 3, tandem VI fixed-ratio (FR) schedules produced higher rates and judgments than equivalent conjunctive VI FR schedule. In Experiment 4, a VI schedule with a reinforcement requirement for a short interresponse time (IRT) produced higher rates and judgments than a simple VI schedule. These results corroborate the view that schedules are a determinant of both response rates and causal judgments. Few current theories of causal judgment predict this pattern of results.     

A comparison of ratio and interval reinforcement schedules with comparable interreinforcement times

Pigeons were trained to peck keys on fixed-ratio and fixed-interval schedules of food reinforcement. Both schedules produced a pattern of behavior characterized as pause and run, but the relation of pausing to time between reinforcers differed for the two schedules even when mean time between reinforcers was the same. Pausing in the fixed ratio occupied less of the time between reinforcers for shorter interreinforcer times. For two of three birds, the relation was reversed at longer interreinforcer times. As an interreinforcer time elapsed, there was an increasing tendency to return to responding for the fixed interval, but a roughly constant tendency to return to responding for the fixed-ratio schedule. In Experiment 1 these observations were made for both single-reinforcement schedules and multiple schedules of fixed-ratio and fixed-interval reinforcement. In Experiment 2 the observations were extended to a comparison of fixed-ratio versus variable-interval reinforcement schedules, where the distribution of interreinforcement times in the variable interval approximated that for the fixed ratio.     

Schedule-induced defecation by rats during ratio and interval schedules of food reinforcement.

Lever pressing in rats was maintained by continuous and intermittent schedules of food while defecation was monitored. In Experiment 1, reinforcement densities were matched across variable-ratio and variable-interval schedules for three pairs of rats. Defecation occurred in all 3 rats on the variable-ratio schedule and in all 3 rats on the yoked variable-interval schedule. In Experiment 2, fixed-ratio and fixed-interval schedules with similar reinforcement densities maintained lever pressing. Defecation occurred in 3 of 4 rats on the fixed-ratio schedule and in 4 of 4 rats on the fixed-interval schedule. Almost no defecation occurred during continuous reinforcement in either experiment. These results demonstrate that defecation may occur during both ratio and interval schedules and that the inter-reinforcement interval is more important than the behavioral requirements of the schedule in generating schedule-induced defecation.     

More on concurrent interval-ratio schedules: a replication and review.

It has been suggested that the failure to maximize reinforcement on concurrent variable-interval, variable-ratio schedules may be misleading. Inasmuch as response costs are not directly measured, it is possible that subjects are optimally balancing the benefits of reinforcement against the costs of responding. To evaluate this hypothesis, pigeons were tested in a procedure in which interval and ratio schedules had equal response costs. On a concurrent variable time (VT), variable ratio-time (VRT) schedule, the VT schedule runs throughout the session and the VRT schedule is controlled by responses to a changeover key that switches from one schedule to the other. Reinforcement is presented independent of response. This schedule retains the essential features of concurrent VI VR, but eliminates differential response costs for the two alternatives. It therefore also eliminates at least one significant ambiguity about the reinforcement maximizing performance. Pigeons did not maximize rate of reinforcement on this procedure. Instead, their times spent on the alternative schedules matched the relative rates of reinforcement, even when schedule parameters were such that matching earned the lowest possible overall rate of reinforcement. It was further shown that the observed matching was not a procedural artifact arising from the constraints built into the schedule.     

Reinforcement and punishment effects in concurrent schedules: A test of two models

The joint effects of punishment and reinforcement on the pigeon's key-peck response were examined in three choice experiments conducted to compare predictions of Farley and Fantino's (1978) subtractive model with those made by Deluty's (1976) and Deluty and Church's (1978) model of punishment. In Experiment 1, the addition of equal punishment schedules to both alternatives of a concurrent reinforcement schedule enhanced the preference exhibited for the more frequent reinforcement alternative. Experiment 2 demonstrated decreases in the absolute response rate for each member of a concurrent reinforcement schedule when increasing frequencies of punishment were added to each alternative. Experiment 3 found that preference for the denser of two reinforcement schedules diminished when the absolute frequencies of reinforcement were increased by a constant factor and conditions of punishment for both alternatives were held constant. Diminished preferences were obtained regardless of whether the frequency of punishment associated with the denser reinforcement schedule was greater or less than that associated with the lean reinforcement alternative. The results from all three experiments uniquely supported Farley and Fantino's (1978) subtractive model of punishment and reinforcement.     

Response elimination in concurrent and single operant situations with pigeons

Two experiments compared the efficiency and durability of elimination of a free operant resulting from omission (OM) or extinction (EXT) when an alternative to the response undergoing elimination was available. Pigeons were pretrained on concurrent VI (Expt I) before response elimination, durability testing, and extinction testing. Maintenance of one operant by the adventitious reinforcement for not emitting a second operant subjected to OM was demonstrated. Response elimination effects were more durable after OM than EXT. Experiment II compared concurrent and single operant paradigms in response elimination with OM and EXT. Response elimination was more rapid and more durable in the concurrent situation than in the single operant situation, and OM conditions were more durable than EXT conditions.     

The schedule dependency of the signaled reinforcement effect

In Experiment 1, rats leverpressed for food reinforcement on either a variable ratio (VR) 30 schedule or a variable interval (VI) 15-s schedule. One group in each condition received a signal filling a 500-ms delay of reinforcement. This treatment enhanced rates on the VR schedule, and attenuated rates on the VI schedule, relative to the rate seen in an unsignaled control condition. In Experiment 2 there was no delay of reinforcement and the signal and food were presented simultaneously. Attenuated rates of responding were observed on VI schedules with a range of mean interval values (15 to 300 s). Experiment 3 used a range of VR schedules (10 to 150) with simultaneous presentations of signal and food. A signal-induced enhancement of response rate was found at all VR values. In Experiment 4, a signal elevated response rates on a tandem VI VR schedule, but depressed rates on a tandem VR VI schedule, compared to control conditions receiving unsignaled delayed reinforcement. These results are taken to show that the effect of a signal accompanying reinforcement depends upon the nature of the behavior that is reinforced during exposure to a given schedule.     

The Probability of Small Schedule Values and Preference for Random-Interval Schedules

Preference for working on variable schedules and temporal discrimination were simultaneously examined in two experiments using a discrete-trial, concurrent-chains arrangement with fixed interval (FI) and random interval (RI) terminal links. The random schedule was generated by first sampling a probability distribution after the programmed delay to reinforcement on the FI schedule had elapsed, and thus the RI never produced a component schedule value shorter than the FI and maintained a rate of reinforcement half that of the FI. Despite these features, the FI was not strongly preferred. The probability of obtaining the smallest programmed delay to reinforcement on the RI schedule was manipulated in Experiment 1, and the interaction of this probability and initial link length was examined in Experiment 2. As the probability of obtaining small values in the RI increased, preference for the schedule increased while the discriminated time of reinforcer availability in the terminal link decreased. Both of these effects were attenuated by lengthening the initial links. The results support the view that in addition to the delay to reinforcement, the probability of obtaining a short delay is an important choice-affecting variable that likely contributes to the robust preferences for variable, as opposed to fixed, schedules of reinforcement.     

Contrast effects in response rate and accuracy of delayed matching to sample

Behavioural contrast is an inverse relation between the response rate in one component of a multiple schedule and the reinforcer rate in an alternated component. To explore possible contrast effects in accuracy as well as response rate, four pigeons were trained in multiple schedules where key pecking produced delayed matching-to-sample trials on a variable-interval schedule. Reinforcer probability for correct matches was constant at .3 in one component, and the conditions of reinforcement were varied in the second component. In Experiment 1, the varied component arranged the same contingencies as the constant component but with reinforcer probabilities of .9 or .1 across conditions. In the varied component, both response rate and accuracy of delayed matching were directly related to reinforcer probability; in the constant component, however, contrast effects on response rate were weak, and there was no evidence of contrast in accuracy of matching. In Experiment 2, the varied component was either variable interval with immediate food reinforcement or extinction. Reliable contrast effects were obtained in both response rate and in accuracy of matching in the constant component, and their magnitudes were correlated within and between subjects. The results of Experiment 2 join previous findings of covariation in the effects of reinforcement on free-operant responding and accuracy of discrimination.