Resistance to change and preference for variable versus fixed response sequences

In Experiment 1, 4 pigeons were trained on a multiple chain schedule in which the initial link was a variable-interval (VI) 20-s schedule signalled by a red or green center key, and terminal links required four responses made to the left (L) and/or right (R) keys. In the REPEAT component, signalled by red keylights, only LRLR terminal-link response sequences were reinforced, while in the VARY component, signalled by green keylights, terminal-link response sequences were reinforced if they satisfied a variability criterion. The reinforcer rate for both components was equated by adjusting the reinforcer probability for correct REPEAT sequences across sessions. Results showed that initial- and terminal-link responding in the VARY component was generally more resistant to prefeeding, extinction, and response-independent food than responding in the REPEAT component. In Experiment 2, the REPEAT and VARY contingencies were arranged as terminal links of a concurrent chain and the relative reinforcer rate was manipulated across conditions. For all pigeons, initial-link response allocation was biased toward the alternative associated with the VARY terminal link. These results replicate previous reports that operant variation is more resistant to change than operant repetition (Doughty & Lattal, 2001), and show that variation is preferred to repetition with reinforcer-related variables controlled. Behavioral momentum theory (Nevin & Grace, 2000) predicts the covariation of preference and resistance to change in Experiments 1 and 2, but does not explain why these aspects of behavior should depend on contingencies that require repetition or variation.     

Effects of ethanol on reinforced variations and repetitions by rats under a multiple schedule.

Response sequences emitted by five Long-Evans rats were reinforced under a two-component multiple schedule. In the REPEAT component, food pellets were contingent upon completion of a left-left-right-right (LLRR) sequence on two levers. In the VARY component, pellets were contingent upon variable sequences (i.e., a sequence was reinforced only if it differed from each of the previous five sequences). The rats learned to emit LLRR sequences in the REPEAT component and variable sequences in VARY. Intraperitoneal injections of ethanol (1.25, 1.75, and 2.25 g/kg) significantly increased sequence variability in REPEAT, thereby lowering reinforcement probability, but had little effect on sequence variability in the VARY component. These results extend previous findings that alcohol impairs the performance of reinforced repetitions but not of reinforced variations in response sequences.     

Persistence and relapse of reinforced behavioral variability

The present study examined persistence and relapse of reinforced behavioral variability in pigeons. Pigeons emitted four‐response sequences across two keys. Sequences produced food according to a lag schedule, in which a response sequence was followed by food if it differed from a certain number of previous sequences. In Experiment 1, food was delivered for sequences that satisfied a lag schedule in both components of a multiple schedule. When reinforcement was removed for one component (i.e., extinction), levels of behavioral variability decreased for only that component. In Experiment 2, food was delivered for sequences satisfying a lag schedule in one component of a multiple schedule. In the other component, food was delivered at the same rate, but without the lag variability requirement (i.e., yoked). Following extinction, levels of behavioral variability returned to baseline for both components after response‐independent food delivery (i.e., reinstatement). In Experiment 3, one group of pigeons responded on a lag variability schedule, and the other group responded on a lag repetition schedule. For both groups, levels of behavioral variability increased when alternative reinforcement was suspended (i.e., resurgence). In each experiment, we observed some evidence for extinction‐induced response variability and for variability as an operant dimension of behavior.     

Effects of response variability on the sensitivity of rule-governed behavior

Two experiments examined the relation between response variability and sensitivity to changes in reinforcement contingencies. In Experiment 1, two groups of college students were provided complete instructions regarding a button-pressing task; the instructions stated “press the button 40 times for each point” (exchangeable for money). Two additional groups received incomplete instructions that omitted the pattern of responding required for reinforcement under the same schedule. Sensitivity was tested in one completely instructed and one incompletely instructed group after responding had met a stability criterion, and for the remaining two groups after a short exposure to the original schedule. The three groups of subjects whose responding was completely instructed or who had met the stability criterion showed little variability at the moment of change in the reinforcement schedule. The responding of these three groups also was insensitive to the contingency change. Incompletely instructed short-exposure responding was more variable at the moment of schedule change and was sensitive to the new contingency in four of six cases. In Experiment 2, completely and incompletely instructed responding first met a stability criterion. This was followed by a test that showed no sensitivity to a contingency change. A strategic instruction was then presented that stated variable responding would work best. Five of 6 subjects showed increased variability after this instruction, and all 6 showed sensitivity to contingency change. The findings are discussed from a selectionist perspective that describes response acquisition as a process of variation, selection, and maintenance. From this perspective, sensitivity to contingency changes is described as a function of variables that produce response variability.     

Choice and response contingencies

Two experiments investigated the extent to which response contingencies influence the choice between two schedules of reinforcement by exposing pigeons to a concurrent-chains procedure in which reinforcers in one terminal link were response-independent, and in the other terminal link, response-dependent. In Experiment 1, the pigeons were indifferent between an aperiodic, response-independent schedule and an aperiodic, response-dependent schedule that required a minimum rate of responding. This finding limits the generality of a required-rate contingency as a determinant of choice, which contingency had been previously demonstrated in a context of periodic reinforcement to evoke preference for an alternate schedule. In Experiment 2, the pigeons preferred a periodic, response-independent schedule to a periodic, response-dependent schedule that shared a feature with a required-rate schedule: there was a requirement to respond early in the interreinforcement interval, when responding produced reinforcement only later. The results of the two experiments suggest the following general interpretation: pigeons prefer a second schedule to the extent that the response contingencies of the first schedule must be satisfied during discriminable periods of nonreinforcement.     

An analysis of procedures that affect response variability

Response variability is sensitive to antecedent and consequent manipulations. Researchers have investigated inducement, direct production through reinforcement, and stimulus control of response variability. Recently, researchers have shown that lag reinforcement schedules reliably increase variability but may also produce higher‐order stereotypy. There has been limited investigation of appropriate variability levels and alternation between repetition and variation. In a three‐part study, we evaluated levels of variability across a group of children, the effects of various procedures on producing response variability and novelty, and the use of schedule‐correlated stimuli for producing rapid alternation between repetition and variation. In Study 1, there was a nearly bimodal distribution of children emitting either low or high variability. In Study 2, for most children, fixed lag 4 and variable lag 4 schedules produced the highest levels of variability and novelty. In Study 3, responding was brought under control of schedule‐correlated stimuli, allowing for rapid alternation between repetition and variation.     

Run length, visit duration, and reinforcers per visit in concurrent performance

The contingencies in each alternative of concurrent procedures consist of reinforcement for staying and reinforcement for switching. For the stay contingency, behavior directed at one alternative earns and obtains reinforcers. For the switch contingency, behavior directed at one alternative earns reinforcers but behavior directed at the other alternative obtains them. In Experiment 1, responses on the main lever, in S1, incremented stay and switch schedules and obtained a stay reinforcer when it became available. Responses on the switch lever changed S1 to S2 and obtained switch reinforcers when available. In S2, neither responses on the main lever nor on the switch lever were reinforced, but a switch response changed S2 to S1. Run lengths and visit durations were a function of the ratio of the scheduled probabilities of reinforcement (staying/switching). From run lengths and visit durations, traditional concurrent performance was synthesized, and that synthesized performance was consistent with the generalized matching law. Experiment 2 replicated and extended this analysis to concurrent variable-interval schedules. The synthesized results challenge any theory of matching that requires a comparison among the alternatives.     

A RUNS‐TEST ALGORITHM: CONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT AND RESPONSE RUN STRUCTURES

Four rats' choices between two levers were differentially reinforced using a runs‐test algorithm. On each trial, a runs‐test score was calculated based on the last 20 choices. In Experiment 1, the onset of stimulus lights cued when the runs score was smaller than criterion. Following cuing, the correct choice was occasionally reinforced with food, and the incorrect choice resulted in a blackout. Results indicated that this contingency reduced sequential dependencies among successive choice responses. With one exception, subjects' choice rule was well described as biased coin flipping. In Experiment 2, cuing was removed and the reinforcement criterion was changed to a percentile score based on the last 20 reinforced responses. The results replicated those of Experiment 1 in successfully eliminating first‐order dependencies in all subjects. For 2 subjects, choice allocation was approximately consistent with nonbiased coin flipping. These results suggest that sequential dependencies may be a function of reinforcement contingency.     

Learning to vary and varying to learn

We compared two sources of behavior variability: decreased levels of reinforcement and reinforcement contingent on variability itself. In Experiment 1, four groups of rats were reinforced for different levels of response-sequence variability: one group was reinforced for low variability, two groups were reinforced for intermediate levels, and one group was reinforced for very high variability. All of the groups experienced three different reinforcement frequencies for meeting their respective variability contingencies. Results showed that reinforcement contingencies controlled response variability more than did reinforcement frequencies. Experiment 2 showed that only those animals concurrently reinforced for high variability acquired a difficult-to-learn sequence; animals reinforced for low variability learned little or not at all. Variability was therefore controlled mainly by reinforcement contingencies, and learning increased as a function of levels of baseline variability. Knowledge of these relationships may be helpful to those who attempt to condition operant responses.     

Comparing preference and resistance to change in constant- and variable-duration schedule components

Two experiments explored preference and resistance to change in concurrent chains in which the terminal links were variable-interval schedules that ended either after a single reinforcer had been delivered (variable duration) or after a fixed period of access to the schedule (constant duration). In Experiment 1, pigeons' preference between the same pair of terminal links overmatched relative reinforcement rate when the terminal links were of constant duration, but not when they were of variable duration. Responding during the richer terminal link decreased less, relative to baseline, when response-independent food was presented during the initial links according to a variable-time schedule. In Experiment 2, all subjects consistently preferred a terminal link that consisted of 20-s access to a variable-interval 20-s schedule over a terminal link that ended after one reinforcer had been delivered by the same schedule. Results of resistance-to-change tests corresponded to preference, as responding during the constant-duration terminal link decreased less, relative to baseline, when disrupted by both response-independent food during the initial links and prefeeding. Overall, these data extend the general covariation of preference and resistance to change seen in previous studies. However, they suggest that reinforcement numerosity, including variability in the number of reinforcers per terminal-link entry, may sometimes affect preference and resistance to change in ways that are difficult to explain in terms of current models.     

Effect of signaled reinforcement on response variability

Three experiments examined the effect of signaling reinforcement on rats' lever pressing on contingencies that reinforced variable responding to extend the exploration of signaled reinforcement to a schedule that has previously not been examined in this respect. In Experiment 1, rats responding on a lag-8 variability schedule with signaled reinforcement displayed greater levels of variability (U values) than rats on the same schedule lacking a reinforcement signal. In Experiment 2, rats responding on a differential reinforcement of least frequent responses schedule also displayed greater operant variability with a signal for reinforcement compared with rats without a reinforcement signal. In Experiment 3, a reinforcement signal decreased the variability of a response sequence when there was no variability requirement. These results offer empirical corroboration that operant variability responds to manipulations in the same manner as do other forms of operant response and that a reinforcement signal facilitates the emission of the required operant.     

Temporal context, preference, and resistance to change

According to behavioral momentum theory, preference and relative resistance to change in concurrent-chains schedules are correlated and reflect the relative conditioned value of discriminative stimuli. In the present study, we explore the generality of this relation by manipulating the temporal context within a concurrent-chains procedure through changes in the duration of the initial links. Consistent with previous findings, preference for a richer terminal link was less extreme with longer initial links across three experiments with pigeons. In Experiment 1, relative resistance to change and preference were related inversely when responding was disrupted with response-independent food presentations during initial links, replicating a previous finding with rats. However, more food was presented with longer initial links, confounding the disrupter and initial-link duration. In Experiment 2, presession feeding was used instead and eliminated the negative relation between relative resistance to change and preference, but relative resistance to change was not sensitive to relative terminal-link reinforcement rates. In Experiment 3, with more extreme relative terminal-link reinforcement rates, increasing initial-link duration similarly decreased preference and relative resistance to change for the richer terminal link. Thus, when conditions of disruption are equal and assessed under the appropriate reinforcement conditions, changes in temporal context impact relative resistance to change and preference similarly.     

Operant conditioning of behavioral variability using a percentile reinforcement schedule.

The present investigation developed and tested a new percentile reinforcement schedule suited to study pattern variability, whose main feature was the relative dissociation it provided between the variability requirement defining criterional responses and overall probability of reinforcement. In a discrete-trials procedure, pigeons produced patterns of four pecks on two response keys. If the pattern emitted on the current trial differed from the N preceding patterns, reinforcement was delivered with probability mu. The schedule continuously adjusted the criterion N such that the probability of a criterional response, estimated from the subject's recent behavior, was always constant. In these circumstances, the criterion corresponded to an invariant percentile in the distribution of recent responses. Using a between-subjects design, Experiment 1 manipulated the variability requirement--the percentile--while keeping overall reinforcement probability constant. The degree of variability varied directly with the requirement. In addition, an inverse relationship existed between the requirement and within-group variance. Experiment 2 manipulated probability of reinforcement while maintaining the variability requirement constant. No consistent relationship was found between variability and reinforcement probability. A tentative hypothesis was advanced ascribing the operant conditioning of behavioral variability to a process of probability-dependent selection.     

ALTERNATIVE REINFORCEMENT INCREASES RESISTANCE TO CHANGE: PAVLOVIAN OR OPERANT CONTINGENCIES?

Two multiple-schedule experiments with pigeons examined the effect of adding food reinforcement from an alternative source on the resistance of the reinforced response (target response) to the decremental effects of satiation and extinction. In Experiment 1, key pecks were reinforced by food in two components according to variable-interval schedules and, in some conditions, food was delivered according to variable-time schedules in one of the components. The rate of key pecking in a component was negatively related to the proportion of reinforcers from the alternative (variable-time) source. Resistance to satiation and extinction, in contrast, was positively related to the overall rate of reinforcement in the component. Experiment 2 was conceptually similar except that the alternative reinforcers were contingent on a specific concurrent response. Again, the rate of the target response varied as a function of its relative reinforcement, but its resistance to satiation and extinction varied directly with the overall rate of reinforcement in the component stimulus regardless of its relative reinforcement. Together the results of the two experiments suggest that the relative reinforcement of a response (the operant contingency) determines its rate, whereas the stimulus-reinforcement contingency (a Pavlovian contingency) determines its resistance to change.     

Suboptimal choice and initial‐link requirement

Pigeons (n = 14) were trained in a concurrent‐chains suboptimal choice procedure that tested the effect of an increased ratio requirement in the initial links. Fixed‐ratio 1 and 25 conditions were manipulated within subjects in a counterbalanced order. In all conditions, distinct terminal‐link stimuli on a suboptimal alternative signaled either primary reinforcement (20% of the time) or extinction (80% of the time). On an optimal alternative, two distinct terminal‐link stimuli each signaled a 50% chance of primary reinforcement. Preference for the suboptimal alternative was significantly attenuated, and in some birds completely reversed, by the larger response requirement irrespective of condition order. This larger response requirement also generated a notable increase in between‐subject variability. A measure of cumulative choice responding is introduced to mitigate the problems associated with traditional session averages. Ordinal predictions of some current theories of suboptimal choice are also considered in light of the results.     

Choice and number of reinforcers

Pigeons were exposed to the concurrent-chains procedure in two experiments designed to investigate the effects of unequal numbers of reinforcers on choice. In Experiment 1, the pigeons were indifferent between long and short durations of access to variable-interval schedules of equal reinforcement density, but preferred a short high-density terminal link over a longer, lower density terminal link, even though in both sets of comparisons there were many more reinforcers per cycle in the longer terminal link. In Experiment 2, the pigeons preferred five reinforcers, the first of which was available after 30 sec, over a single reinforcer available at 30 sec, but only when the local interval between successive reinforcers was short. The pigeons were indifferent when this local interval was sufficiently long. The pigeons' behavior appeared to be under the control of local terminal-link variables, such as the intervals to the first reinforcer and between successive reinforcers, and was not well described in terms of transformed delays of reinforcement or reductions in average delay to reinforcement.     

Effects on preference of reinforcement delay, number of reinforcers, and terminal-link duration

Three experiments used concurrent-chains procedures to examine the effects of reinforcement delay, number of reinforcers, and terminal-link duration on preference. In Condition 30 of Experiment 1, food was delivered after 30 seconds in each 150-second terminal link, with four additional food deliveries occurring at 30-second intervals in one of the links. In Condition 5, food was delivered after 5 seconds in each 25-second terminal link, and the four additional reinforcers were delivered at 5-second intervals. Preferences for the multiple-food chain were greater in Condition 30. In Experiment 2, the terminal link(s) providing only one reinforcer terminated immediately after delivery of the reinforcer. Preferences for the multiple-food chain were smaller than in Experiment 1. In Condition 5 of Experiment 3, food was delivered after 5, 75, 100, 125, and 150 seconds in one 150-second link and after 5 seconds in the other. Condition 50 differed only in that the first (or only) reinforcer in each link was delivered after 50 seconds instead of after 5 seconds. Preferences for the multiple-food chain were greater in Condition 50. Results of Experiments 1 and 2 do not correspond to results obtained by Moore (1979).     

Development of complex, stereotyped behavior in pigeons

A pigeon's peck on one key moved a light down one position in a 5×5 matrix of lights, while a peck on another key moved the light across one position. Reinforcement depended upon the occurrence of four pecks on each key (moving the matrix light from the top left to the bottom right), and a fifth peck on either key ended a trial without food. Though there were 70 different sequences that led to reinforcement, each of 12 pigeons developed a particular, stereotyped sequence which dominated its behavior (Experiment 1). Extinction produced substantial increases in sequence variability (Experiment 2). Removal of the matrix cues disrupted performance, though it partially recovered with extended training (Experiment 3). The pigeons did not master a contingency which required a different sequence on the current trial than on the previous one (Experiment 4), though they were able to learn to emit sequences which began with either left-left or left-right response patterns (Experiment 5). The experiments suggest that contingencies of reinforcement may contribute to the creation of complex units of behavior, and that stereotypy may be a likely consequence of contingent reinforcement.     

Conditioned reinforcement value and choice.

The delay-reduction hypothesis of conditioned reinforcement states that the reinforcing value of a food-associated stimulus is determined by the delay to primary reinforcement signaled by the onset of the stimulus relative to the average delay to primary reinforcement in the conditioning situation. In contrast, most contemporary models of conditioned reinforcement strength posit that the reinforcing strength of a stimulus is some simple function only of the delay to primary reinforcement in the presence of stimulus. The delay-reduction hypothesis diverges from other conditioned reinforcement models in that it predicts that a fixed-duration food-paired stimulus will have different reinforcing values depending on the frequency of its presentation. In Experiment 1, pigeons' key pecks were reinforced according to concurrent-chains schedules with variable-interval 10-second and variable-interval 20-second terminal-link schedules. The initial-link schedule preceding the shorter terminal link was always variable-interval 60 seconds, and the initial-link schedule requirement preceding the longer terminal link was varied between 1 second and 60 seconds across conditions. In Experiment 2, the initial-link schedule preceding the longer of two terminal links was varied for each of three groups of pigeons. The terminal links of the concurrent chains for the three groups were variable-interval 10 seconds and 20 seconds, variable-interval 10 seconds and 30 seconds, and variable-interval 30 seconds and 50 seconds. In both experiments, preference for the shorter terminal link was either a bitonic function or an inverse function of the initial-link schedule preceding the longer terminal-link schedule. Consistent with the predictions of the delay-reduction hypothesis, the relative values of the terminal-link stimuli changed as a function of the overall frequency of primary reinforcement. Vaughan's (1985) melioration model, which was shown to be formally similar to Squires and Fantino's (1971) delay-reduction model, can be modified so as to predict these results without changing its underlying assumptions.