Preference for multiple versus mixed schedules of reinforcement

Five pigeons were trained in a concurrent-chain procedure. In the initial links, equal nonindependent variable-interval schedules were available concurrently on two keys. Completing the schedule on either key led to exclusive presentation of one of two further variable-interval schedules for a fixed period of time. During these terminal links, as many reinforcers as were scheduled could be obtained. If the response producing this terminal link occurred on one key, differential stimuli signaled which variable-interval schedule had been produced. If the response producing the terminal link occurred on the other key, no such differential stimuli were available. Once the fixed period of time elapsed, the initial links were reinstated. In Experiment 1, the period of time for which the terminal links were available was always 10 s and the absolute duration of the initial links was varied. Subjects preferred the alternative leading to the multiple schedule when the initial-link duration was short, but preferred the alternative leading to the mixed schedule when the initial-link durations were longer. In Experiment 2, both the initial-link duration and the duration of the terminal links were varied. The effect of initial-link duration was identical to that in Experiment 1 and there was no systematic effect of varying the terminal-link duration.     

Rapid determinations of preference in multiple concurrent-chain schedules.

With concurrent chains arranged for a pigeon's key pecks, pecks on two concurrently available initial-link keys (left and right) respectively produce separately operating terminal links (A and B). Preferences for terminal link A over terminal link B are usually calculated as deviations of relative initial-link response rates (left divided by total pecks) from those during baseline conditions, when A equals B. Baseline preferences, however, are often variable and typically are determined indirectly (e.g., with unequal A and B, reversing left-right assignments of A and B over sessions and estimating the baseline from differences between the relative rates generated). Multiple concurrent-chain schedules, with components each consisting of a pair of concurrent chains, speed the determination of preferences by arranging A and B and their reversal within sessions. In two experiments illustrating the feasibility of this procedure, one component operated with circles projected on initial-link keys and the other with pluses; when left and right initial-link pecks respectively produced terminal links A and B in one component, they produced B and A in the other. Even as the baselines fluctuated, preference was observable within sessions as the difference between relative initial-link response rates in the two components. The first experiment demonstrated the rapid development of preferences when terminal links A and B consisted of fixed-interval 15-s and 30-s schedules. The second demonstrated the sensitivity of the procedure to preference for a fixed-interval 30-s schedule operating for pecks on either of two keys (free choice) over its operating for pecks on only a single key (forced choice).     

Response-reinforcer dependence and independence in multiple and mixed schedules

Albino rats were conditioned to lever press during two-component multiple and mixed schedules in which response-dependent and response-independent reinforcers occurred in the different components. Relative response rates in the components associated with response-dependent reinforcers were higher (a) when different visual and auditory stimuli were associated with the two components and (b) when mixed schedule components were long in duration. These results illustrate the contribution of the response-reinforcer relation to stimulus control and schedule control of behavior. They also suggest that under some conditions, reinforcers need not be consistently associated with a particular response to ensure that the response is maintained at a relatively high rate.     

An analysis of contrast effects in multiple schedules

Some phenomena of behavioral contrast in multiple schedules are reviewed, and three accounts of contrast are considered. Rate changes within a constant schedule component (transient contrasts) are distinguished from rate changes across successive schedule cycles (sustained contrasts). Pigeons were exposed to a three-component multiple schedule, in which a stimulus correlated with a constant variable interval schedule of reinforcement was preceded by a stimulus correlated with more frequent variable interval reinforcement, or by an extinction stimulus. If the preceding stimulus was correlated with more frequent reinforcement, the response rate in the constant component was low and increased with time. If the preceding stimulus was correlated with extinction, the rate in the constant component was high and decreased with time. Similar transient contrasts were observed in a two-component multiple schedule with different variable interval schedules in the two components. The transient contrast effects in the three-component schedule were shown to depend on differential reinforcement frequency rather than differential response rate in the preceding component. Such transient contrasts were not sufficient to account for sustained contrast effects observed in these experiments. The relation of these findings to the concepts of excitation and inhibition is discussed.     

Effects of multiple versus chained schedules on stereotypy and item engagement

We evaluated rates of automatically reinforced stereotypy and item engagement for 2 children with autism under multiple and chained schedules in a multielement design. Each schedule included components during which stereotypy was blocked (S–) or allowed (S+), and we used colored cards as schedule‐correlated stimuli. We report rates of stereotypy and item engagement during S– and S+ components, as well as the percentage of component time that elapsed before the first instances of stereotypy and item engagement. We observed less stereotypy and more consistent item engagement during chained‐schedule sessions, and stimulus control of stereotypy and item engagement was established with the chained schedule. A subsequent concurrent‐chains analysis revealed participant preference for the chained schedule. These results highlight the importance of contingent access to stereotypy when therapists attempt to gain stimulus control of stereotypy and increase functional item engagement.     

Variable-ratio versus variable-interval schedules: response rate, resistance to change, and preference

Two experiments asked whether resistance to change depended on variable-ratio as opposed to variable-interval contingencies of reinforcement and the different response rates they establish. In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained on multiple random-ratio random-interval schedules with equated reinforcer rates. Baseline response rates were disrupted by intercomponent food, extinction, and prefeeding. Resistance to change relative to baseline was greater in the interval component, and the difference was correlated with the extent to which baseline response rates were higher in the ratio component. In Experiment 2, pigeons were trained on multiple variable-ratio variable-interval schedules in one half of each session and on concurrent chains in the other half in which the terminal links corresponded to the multiple-schedule components. The schedules were varied over six conditions, including two with equated reinforcer rates. In concurrent chains, preference strongly overmatched the ratio of obtained reinforcer rates. In multiple schedules, relative resistance to response-independent food during intercomponent intervals, extinction, and intercomponent food plus extinction depended on the ratio of obtained reinforcer rates but was less sensitive than was preference. When reinforcer rates were similar, both preference and relative resistance were greater for the variable-interval schedule, and the differences were correlated with the extent to which baseline response rates were higher on the variable-ratio schedule, confirming the results of Experiment 1. These results demonstrate that resistance to change and preference depend in part on response rate as well as obtained reinforcer rate, and challenge the independence of resistance to change and preference with respect to response rate proposed by behavioral momentum theory.     

Preference for mixed- versus fixed-ratio schedules

Pigeons' pecks on one key produced a stimulus correlated with a mixed-ratio schedule of food reinforcement. Pecks on a second key produced a stimulus correlated with a fixed-ratio schedule. When the arithmetic mean of the mixed ratios equaled the fixed ratio, the former stimulus maintained a higher rate of pecking. When the fixed ratio was sufficiently smaller, preference shifted to it. The pigeons' relative preference for the schedules could be described by comparing the geometric mean of the reinforcement rates in the several mixed-ratio components with the reinforcement rates in the fixed-ratio components.     

Preference for mixed-interval versus fixed-interval schedules

Pigeons were trained on a two-link concurrent chain schedule in which responses on two keys were reinforced according to independent variable-interval schedules by the production of a change in key color. Further responses on the key on which the stimulus change had been produced gave a single food reinforcement and a return to concurrent variable-interval conditions. On one key the terminal link was a two-valued mixed-interval schedule, while on the other, the terminal link was a fixed-interval schedule. When the mixed-interval values were kept constant and the fixed-interval values varied, relative response rates in the initial concurrent links matched relative reinforcement rates in the terminal links when these were computed from cubic transformations of the reciprocals of the intervals comprising the terminal link schedules.     

Defining behavioral contrast for multiple schedules

Two different definitions of behavioral contrast have been used for multiple schedules. One, interschedule, definition identifies contrast as changes in the rates of responding which occur when subjects move from one multiple schedule to another. The other, intraschedule, definition emphasizes changes in the rates of responding which occur relative to a baseline rate of responding. The baseline is the rate of responding emitted during a multiple schedule that supplies equal rates of reinforcement in the two components. The distinction between these two definitions is important for empirical and theoretical reasons. For example, theoretical confusion has arisen when the interschedule definition has been used to test and reject theories which implicitly define contrast by the intraschedule definition.     

The influence of mindset abstraction on preference for mixed versus extreme approaches to multigoal pursuits

Facing multiple conflicting goals, consumers may attempt to simultaneously pursue multiple goals by choosing mixed vice–virtue bundles in each consumption episode (mixed approach). Alternatively, they may maximize their pursuit of one goal at a time and sequentially manage multiple goals by alternating between pure-virtue and pure-vice bundles across consumption episodes (extreme approach). The current research proposes that consumer preferences between the two approaches depend on mindset abstraction. Across four experimental studies in the domains of food and financial decision-making, we demonstrate that, relative to an abstract mindset, a concrete mindset increases preference for the extreme approach over the mixed approach. Furthermore, by observing actual food choices over a seven-day period, this research provides a comprehensive picture of how a chronic mindset relates to multigoal management in long-term consumption patterns. The findings have both theoretical implications for the goal literature and managerial implications for marketers and policymakers.     

Changeover behavior and preference in concurrent schedules

Pigeons were trained on a multiple schedule of reinforcement in which separate concurrent schedules occurred in each of two components. Key pecking was reinforced with milo. During one component, a variable-interval 40-s schedule was concurrent with a variable-interval 20-s schedule; during the other component, a variable-interval 40-s schedule was concurrent with a variable-interval 80-s schedule. During probe tests, the stimuli correlated with the two variable-interval 40-s schedules were presented simultaneously to assess preference, measured by the relative response rates to the two stimuli. In Experiment 1, the concurrently available variable-interval 20-s schedule operated normally; that is, reinforcer availability was not signaled. Following this baseline training, relative response rate during the probes favored the variable-interval 40-s alternative that had been paired with the lower valued schedule (i.e., with the variable-interval 80-s schedule). In Experiment 2, a signal for reinforcer availability was added to the high-value alternative (i.e., to the variable-interval 20-s schedule), thus reducing the rate of key pecking maintained by that schedule but leaving the reinforcement rate unchanged. Following that baseline training, relative response rates during probes favored the variable-interval 40-s alternative that had been paired with the higher valued schedule. The reversal in the pattern of preference implies that the pattern of changeover behavior established during training, and not reinforcement rate, determined the preference patterns obtained on the probe tests.     

Preference for fluent versus disfluent work schedules

Two studies were conducted that examined the preference of a student diagnosed with a brain injury. In Study 1, a preference assessment was followed by a three-choice concurrent-operants reinforcer assessment. Two choices resulted in access to preferred activities for completing work, and a third choice resulted in access to nothing (i.e., no activity). Unpredictably, the participant consistently chose the no-activity option. Study 2 examined why this student preferred work associated with no activity over preferred activities. Through a variety of concurrent-operants procedures, it was determined that she preferred fluent work followed by reinforcers rather than work that was broken up by access to preferred activities. Implications for research on preference are discussed.     

Reversal of preference under progressive-ratio schedules by punishment

A progressive-ratio reinforcement schedule, in which successive reinforcements required an additional 50 responses, was programmed on one key. A response on a second key reset the progressive-ratio schedule to the first step. Before punishment, all pigeons consistently reset the schedule after reinforcement on the first step, thereby minimizing the number of responses required for reinforcement. Punishment was a brief electric shock contingent upon each response on the reset key. The first effect of punishment was to change the frequency of extra responses on the reset key. Under higher intensities of punishment, the pigeons completed the advanced steps of the progressive-ratio schedule before resetting to the first step. Completions of advanced steps were accompanied by decreases in the overall rate of responding and the rate of reinforcement. When the punishment contingency was removed, the major features of pre-punishment performance were recovered.     

Continuous versus discrete dimensions of reinforcement schedules: An integrative analysis

An approach to reinforcement-schedule contingencies is presented that accommodates continuous as well as discrete effective dimensions of responses and reinforcers. College students' wheel turning was reinforced by projected reading material according to four schedule contingencies that incorporated either a discontinuous (count) or continuous (duration) dimension of the response and the reinforcer. The contingencies arranged a 1:1 correspondence between (a) response count and consequent stimulus count, (b) response duration and stimulus count, (c) response count and stimulus duration, and (d) response duration and stimulus duration. Contingencies incorporating response count produced moderate to high rates of very short-duration responses. Contingencies incorporating response duration produced very low-rate, long-duration responding. The dimension of the reinforcer had minimal or no additional effect. We suggest that incorporating duration and other continuous dimensions into schedule contingencies may improve our understanding of both laboratory and nonlaboratory behavior.     

Discrimination of schedules that predict reinforcement from non-predictive ones and preference for less predictive schedules by rats

This study examined the behavior of rats on schedules that either did or did not contain information about impending reinforcement. Experiment 1 indicated that rats discriminated between schedules of reinforcement that differed only in the amount of information they contained about impending reinforcement. Experiment 2 revealed a preference for the schedule containing less information about impending reinforcement. The results suggest that predictable nonreinforcement is an important determiner of behavior in choice situations.     

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.     

Children's preference for mixed‐ versus fixed‐ratio schedules of reinforcement: A translational study of risky choice

Laboratory research has shown that when subjects are given a choice between fixed‐ratio and bi‐valued mixed‐ratio schedules of reinforcement, preference typically emerges for the mixed‐ratio schedule even with a larger ratio requirement. The current study sought to replicate and extend these findings to children's math problem completion. Using an ABCBC reversal design, four fourth‐grade students were given the choice of completing addition problems reinforced on either a fixed‐ratio 5 schedule or one of three mixed‐ratio schedules; an equivalent mixed‐ratio (1, 9) schedule, a mixed‐ratio (1, 11) schedule with a 20% larger ratio requirement, and an equally lean mixed‐ratio (5, 7) schedule without the small fixed‐ratio 1 component. This was followed by a reversal back to the preceding phase in which preference for the mixed‐ratio schedule had been observed, and a final reversal back to the mixed‐ratio (5, 7) phase. Findings were consistent with previous research in that all children preferred the mixed‐ratio (1, 9) schedule over the equivalent fixed‐ratio 5 schedule. Preference persisted for the leaner mixed‐ratio (1, 11) schedule for three of the four children. Indifference or preference for the fixed‐ratio 5 alternative was observed in phases containing the mixed‐ratio (5, 7) schedule. These results extend previous research on risky choice to children's math problem completion and highlight the importance of a small ratio component in the emergence of preference for bi‐valued mixed‐ratio schedules. Implications of these results for arranging reinforcement to increase children's academic responding are discussed.