Altering "motivational" variables alters induction produced by upcoming food-pellet reinforcement

Previous research has demonstrated that rats will increase their rates of lever pressing for sucrose rewards in the first half of an experimental session when food pellets, rather than the same sucrose, continually serve as the reward in the second half of the session. This effect has been coined induction, and the present study investigated whether it could be altered by altering "motivational" variables. Experiment 1 manipulated subjects' motivation by altering, across conditions, their level of food deprivation. Predictably, the size of induction varied directly with level of deprivation. Experiments 2 and 3 manipulated subjects' motivation by feeding them food pellets and sucrose, respectively, prior to their responding in the experimental session. These pre-session feedings decreased the size of the observed induction in both experiments. The results from the present study indicate that the size of induction is correlated with subjects' motivation to respond for the available reinforcers. They are also consistent with the idea that operant processes underlie the effect. The notion that induction might encompass the concept of "anticipation" is also discussed. Electronic Publication     

Induction produced by upcoming food-pellet reinforcement: Effects on subsequent operant responding

Research has demonstrated that rats' rates of operant behavior maintained by 1% sucrose reinforcement in the first half of an experimental session are heightened when food-pellet reinforcers, rather than 1% sucrose, will be available in the second half. Experiment 1 showed that rats that had been displaying this positive induction effect acquired a new response more quickly when 1% sucrose was used to reinforce the novel response than did rats that had not been displaying induction. Experiment 2 showed that this enhanced acquisition remained even when the new response was learned in a new environment. Experiment 3 showed that unconditioned rates of making a new response did not differ between subjects that had or had not been displaying induction. Experiment 4 further showed that significantly different rates of responding on a novel task were not observed when that response was reinforced with a new, non-sucrose reinforcer. Together, the present results suggest that induction results in and/or from an increase in the reinforcing value of the 1% sucrose. As such, the present results have both theoretical and practical implications.     

Three factors that promote positive induction when rats respond for 1% sucrose

Studies have demonstrated that rats will increase their operant rate of response for a low-valued reinforcer if a high-valued reinforcer will be available later in the session. Research on this positive induction effect suggests that at least three factors account for its appearance: premature responding for the yet unavailable high-valued reinforcer, an increase in the reinforcing value of the low-valued reinforcer, and responding controlled (e.g., elicited) by the response manipulandum. The present experiment tested whether the size of induction could be systematically altered by varying these factors. Twenty-four rats responded in sessions in which 1% sucrose or a food pellet served as the reinforcer in the first or second half of the session. In some sessions, the same operant response was required in both halves of the session. In others, different responses were required. Half of the rats received the different reinforcers in one food trough while the other half received reinforcers in the different halves of the session in different food troughs. Results demonstrated that a large positive induction effect was observed when all of the above factors were present to contribute to the effect (i.e., high-valued reinforcer upcoming, earned by making the same response, delivered to the same food trough). A small, but significant, induction effect remained when all three were absent (i.e., high-valued reinforcer delivered first, earned by making a different response, delivered to a different food trough). The results support the idea that these three factors are the main contributors to the appearance of this positive induction effect. However, at least one additional factor must also contribute.     

Investigating retrospective influences on induction in rats' responding for 1% sucrose when food-pellet reinforcement is upcoming

When rats lever press for 1% sucrose reinforcement in the first half of a 50-min session, response rates are higher when food-pellet reinforcement will be available in the second half than when 1% sucrose will be available. Results of past research have suggested that, under some conditions, this induction effect is prospective in nature (i.e., controlled by the conditions of reinforcement in the present session). However, that research did not rule out the possibility that, under other conditions, retrospective factors (i.e., the conditions of reinforcement in the previous session[s]) could contribute. In the present study, rats responded in two types of session, one in which 1% sucrose reinforcement was available in both halves of the session and one in which 1% sucrose and food-pellet reinforcement were available in the first and second halves, respectively. Which type of session was in effect unsignaled and session type alternated every session (Experiment 1), every second session (Experiment 2), or after at least 20 consecutive sessions of one type (Experiment 3). Across experiments, the results indicated that it takes several sessions of one type for observable retrospective effects to occur, but those effects are short lived. These results allow the authors to identify the mechanisms that must underlie induction. The authors also discuss induction as an animal model of anticipation.     

Interactions between the effects of food and water motivating operations on food‐ and water‐reinforced responding in mice

Two experiments examined interactions between the effects of food and water motivating operations (MOs) on the food‐ and water‐reinforced operant behavior of mice. In Experiment 1, mice responded for sucrose pellets and then water reinforcement under four different MOs: food deprivation, water deprivation, concurrent food and water deprivation, and no deprivation. The most responding for pellets occurred under food deprivation and the most responding for water occurred under water deprivation. Concurrent food and water deprivation decreased responding for both reinforcers. Nevertheless, water deprivation alone increased pellet‐reinforced responding and food deprivation alone likewise increased water‐reinforced responding relative to no deprivation. Experiment 2 demonstrated that presession food during concurrent food and water deprivation increased in‐session responding for water relative to sessions where no presession food was provided. Conversely, presession water during concurrent food and water deprivation did not increase in‐session responding for pellets. These results suggest that a) the reinforcing value of a single stimulus can be affected by multiple MOs, b) a single MO can affect the reinforcing value of multiple stimuli, and c) reinforcing events can also function as MOs. We consider implications for theory and practice and suggest strategies for further basic research on MOs.     

Effect of upcoming reward type when rats press a lever for ethanol

Rats' operant responding for sucrose rewards in the 1st half of a session can vary directly with the conditions of reward in the 2nd half. The authors investigated whether that induction effect represented an animal model of emotive states. Rats pressed a lever for either ethanol or sucrose rewards in the 1st half of a 40-min session. The reward in the 2nd half of the session was, across conditions, 1% sucrose, a food pellet, or the same reinforcer delivered in the 1st half. When subjects responded for sucrose, upcoming reward type had little influence on responding in the 1st half of the session. However, when subjects responded for ethanol, upcoming 1% sucrose and food-pellet reinforcement both produced increases in responding. The results suggest that the procedure produced different emotive states, but further work is needed to support such a model. The results also have potential applied implications.     

Induction when rats lick for 1% liquid-sucrose reinforcement

Previous research reported that rats responding for 1% liquid-sucrose reinforcement when 32% sucrose reinforcement is upcoming will decrease their response rate (contrast) if licking is the dependent measure and increase their response rate (induction) if pressing a lever is the dependent measure. The present study investigated whether induction could be observed when licking served as the dependent measure and whether induction in lever pressing and contrast in licking behaviour could be concurrently observed. Experiment 1 found induction when rats licked to earn the rewards but consumed them at a location separate from the spout licked to earn them. Experiment 2 also found induction when rats earned (and consumed) rewards by licking the same spout throughout the session. Experiment 3 separately measured instrumental lever pressing for sucrose rewards and licking the sucrose during the reward period. We found that both measures increased for 1% sucrose when 32% sucrose reinforcement was upcoming. The present results indicate that the type of response is not the sole determinant of whether contrast or induction is observed. Rather, they suggest that other procedural details, such as the location of reinforcer delivery, influence which effect is observed. The results also indicate that associative processes underlie the appearance of induction in responding for 1% sucrose.     

Induction when rats lick for 1% liquid-sucrose reinforcement

Previous research reported that rats responding for 1% liquid-sucrose reinforcement when 32% sucrose reinforcement is upcoming will decrease their response rate (contrast) if licking is the dependent measure and increase their response rate (induction) if pressing a lever is the dependent measure. The present study investigated whether induction could be observed when licking served as the dependent measure and whether induction in lever pressing and contrast in licking behaviour could be concurrently observed. Experiment 1 found induction when rats licked to earn the rewards but consumed them at a location separate from the spout licked to earn them. Experiment 2 also found induction when rats earned (and consumed) rewards by licking the same spout throughout the session. Experiment 3 separately measured instrumental lever pressing for sucrose rewards and licking the sucrose during the reward period. We found that both measures increased for 1% sucrose when 32% sucrose reinforcement was upcoming. The present results indicate that the type of response is not the sole determinant of whether contrast or induction is observed. Rather, they suggest that other procedural details, such as the location of reinforcer delivery, influence which effect is observed. The results also indicate that associative processes underlie the appearance of induction in responding for 1% sucrose.     

Effects of sucrose concentration and goal units on runway behavior in the rat

Experiment 1 investigated the between-S and within-S effects of sucrose concentration (32 and 6%) and number of goal units (equal volumes of sucrose presented in single or multiple goal cups). The goal-unit variable had no effect on behavior under any of several test conditions employed. Within-S effects of sucrose concentration were approximately equal to between-S effects; no contrast effects were found. When 64 and 6% sucrose solutions were used as reinforcers in Experiment 2, a simultaneous, but not a successive, negative contrast effect was found. Results were discussed in terms of possible functional differences between the successive and simultaneous contrast paradigms and between sucrose solutions and solid food as reinforcers.     

Latent inhibition of US signal value.

Three experiments with rats examined the effects of preexposure to an unconditioned stimulus (US; a single food pellet) on the subsequent ability of that US to effectively signal the delivery of three food pellets during a US-US conditioning procedure. In Experiment 1, latent inhibition (LI) rats showed attenuated conditioning, compared to control (C) rats, when a single food pellet, delivered 10 minutes into a session, was followed by three additional pellets. In preexposure, one pellet had been delivered 10 minutes into each session (in group LI), or placed into the magazine at the beginning of each session (in group C). Experiment 2 showed that this effect was evident when the conditions of preexposure matched those of conditioning for group C, and Experiment 3 showed that the difference between groups LI and C was not a product of context conditioning, or latent inhibition to the noise of the feeder in group LI. Implications of these results for theories of latent inhibition are considered.     

Positive and negative contrast as a function of component duration for key pecking and treadle pressing

Pigeons responded on several multiple schedules for food reinforcers. The duration of the components varied from four seconds to 16 minutes. The absolute size of positive (Experiment 1) and negative (Experiment 2) behavioral contrast varied inversely with component duration when key pecks produced the reinforcers. The absolute size of negative contrast varied directly with component duration, when treadle presses produced the reinforcers (Experiment 3). These results conform to theories that suggest that positive and negative contrast are symmetrical when pigeons peck keys. They also conform to theories that suggest that the same principles do not govern contrast when pigeons peck keys as when they press treadles. Finally, the results support the measurement of behavioral contrast by the differences between baseline rates of responding and the rates emitted when contrast is present.     

Food-paired stimuli as conditioned reinforcers: effects of d-amphetamine.

Seven pigeons were studied in two experiments in which key pecks were reinforced under a second-order schedule wherein satisfaction of variable-interval schedule requirements produced food or a brief stimulus. In the second part of each session, responses produced only the brief stimulus according to a variable-interval schedule (food extinction). For the 4 pigeons in Experiment 1, the response key was red throughout the session. In separate phases, the brief stimulus was either paired with food, not paired with food, or not presented during extinction. d-Amphetamine (0.3 to 10.0 mg/kg) dose-dependently reduced food-maintained responding during the first part of the session and, at intermediate dosages, increased responding during the extinction portion of the session. The magnitude of these increases, however, did not consistently depend on whether the brief stimulus was paired, not paired, or not presented. It was also true that under nondrug conditions, response rates during extinction did not differ reliably depending on pairing operations for the brief stimulus. In Experiment 2, 3 different pigeons responded under a procedure wherein the key was red in the component with food presentations and blue in the extinction component (i.e., multiple schedule). Again, d-amphetamine produced dose-related decreases in responding during the first part of a session and increases in responding in the second part of the session. These increases, however, were related to the pairing operations; larger increases were observed when the brief stimulus was paired with food than when it was not or when it was not presented at all. Under nondrug conditions, the paired brief stimulus controlled higher response rates during extinction than did a nonpaired stimulus or no stimulus. These findings suggest that d-amphetamine can enhance the efficacy of conditioned reinforcers, and that this effect may be more robust if conditioned reinforcers occur in the context of a signaled period of extinction.     

Stock optimizing: maximizing reinforcers per session on a variable-interval schedule.

In Experiment 1, 2 monkeys earned their daily food ration by pressing a key that delivered food according to a variable-interval 3-min schedule. In Phases 1 and 4, sessions ended after 3 hr. In Phases 2 and 3, sessions ended after a fixed number of responses that reduced food intake and body weights from levels during Phases 1 and 4. Monkeys responded at higher rates and emitted more responses per food delivery when the food earned in a session was reduced. In Experiment 2, monkeys earned their daily food ration by depositing tokens into the response panel. Deposits delivered food according to a variable-interval 3-min schedule. When the token supply was unlimited (Phases 1, 3, and 5), sessions ended after 3 hr. In Phases 2 and 4, sessions ended after 150 tokens were deposited, resulting in a decrease in food intake and body weight. Both monkeys responded at lower rates and emitted fewer responses per food delivery when the food earned in a session was reduced. Experiment 1's results are consistent with a strength account, according to which the phases that reduced body weights increased food's value and therefore increased subjects' response rates. The results of Experiment 2 are consistent with an optimizing strategy, because lowering response rates when food is restricted defends body weight on variable-interval schedules. These contrasting results may be attributed to the discriminability of the contingency between response number and the end of a session being greater in Experiment 2 than in Experiment 1. In consequence, subjects lowered their response rates in order to increase the number of reinforcers per session (stock optimizing).     

Within-session changes in responding during concurrent schedules with different reinforcers in the components.

Rats and pigeons responded on several concurrent schedules that provided different reinforcers in the two components (food and water for rats, Experiment 1; wheat and mixed grain for pigeons, Experiment 2). The rate of responding and the time spent responding on each component usually changed within the session. The within-session changes in response rates and time spent responding usually followed different patterns for the two components of a concurrent schedule. For most subjects, the bias and sensitivity to reinforcement parameters of the generalized matching law, as well as the percentage of the variance accounted for, decreased within the session. Negative sensitivity parameters were sometimes found late in the session for the concurrent food-water schedules. These results imply that within-session changes in responding could cause problems for assessing the validity of quantitative theories of concurrent-schedule responding when the components provide different reinforcers. They question changes in a general motivational state, such as arousal, as a complete explanation for within-session changes in responding. The results are compatible with satiation for, or sensitization-habituation to, the reinforcers as explanations.     

Assessing potential reinforcement-like effects of brief stimuli unrelated to food reinforcers

It is widely assumed that reinforcers are biologically relevant stimuli, or stimuli that have been associated with biologically relevant stimuli. However, brief, arbitrary stimuli have also been reported to have reinforcement-like effects, despite being unrelated to biologically relevant stimuli like food. The present study explored the potential reinforcement-like effects of brief stimuli across 5 experiments. In Experiments 1 through 4, pigeon subjects responded for food reinforcement and brief stimulus presentations in a 2-component multiple schedule. Neither baseline response rates nor resistance to change during disruption tests were systematically greater in a component with versus without brief stimulus presentations. Increasing the rate and duration of brief stimulus presentations in Experiment 4 did not reveal reinforcement-like effects when compared directly with food. In Experiment 5, pigeons chose between independent terminal links in a concurrent-chains procedure. Across conditions, varying the location, duration, and rate of brief stimulus presentations in the terminal links had no systematic effects on preference. In contrast, varying rates of food reinforcers resulted in large and reliable shifts in preference. Therefore, the present study found no systematic evidence that brief stimuli unrelated to food reliably increase response rates, resistance to change, or preference. These data demonstrate the value of systematic replication, and a behavioral momentum approach to assessing potential reinforcement-like effects.     

Signalled and unsignalled percentage reinforcement of performance under a chained schedule

Pigeons were trained to peck a key under a chained fixed-ratio 15 fixed-interval 25-sec schedule of food presentation. In Experiment 1, blocks of sessions in which 100%, 75%, 50%, and 25% of the sequences ended with food presentation were conducted. When food presentation was omitted, a timeout of equal duration replaced it. As the frequency of food presentation decreased so did the frequency of completing the chained schedule. In Experiment 2, 75%, 50%, or 25% of the sequences terminated with food presentation and outcomes were signalled, i.e., completion of the fixed ratio resulted in either a stimulus correlated with the fixed-interval 25-sec schedule or a stimulus correlated with extinction. As the frequency of food presentation decreased, the number of sequences completed per session increased for two pigeons and remained high for a third. In Experiments 3 and 4, assessments of the effects of signalling the outcome of the chained schedule were made with response-independent presentation of events at the end of the sequence. Again, signalling the outcome of the chained schedule led to more chains being completed per session than did not signalling the outcome. Stimuli differentially paired with food presentation have powerful behavioral effects that may be attributed to the potency of these stimuli as conditioned reinforcers.     

Closed-economy multiple-schedule performance: Effects of deprivation and session duration

Three pigeons responded for food reinforcement on multiple variable-interval schedules in which the total consumption of food was entirely determined by the subjects' interaction with the schedules (a closed economy). The finding of overmatching, where response allocation between components is more extreme than the distribution of reinforcers, was reconfirmed. Generalized-matching sensitivity decreased from overmatching to undermatching values typical of conventional multiple schedules when food deprivation was increased by decreasing session duration, but not when deprivation was increased by decreasing overall reinforcer rate. Sensitivity also increased from undermatching to overmatching as session duration increased from 100 min to 24 hr, while deprivation was held constant by decreasing overall reinforcer rate. These results can be understood in terms of increases in the value of extraneous reinforcers relative to food reinforcers as deprivation decreases or as the economy for extraneous reinforcers becomes more closed. However, no published quantitative expression of the effects of extraneous reinforcers is entirely consistent with the results.     

Discrimination between outcomes in instrumental learning: Effects of preexposure to the reinforcers

In two experiments rats received instrumental training with two response levers, one response being reinforced by sucrose solution and the other by sucrose pellets. Prior to a test session, on which both levers were made available in the absence of reinforcement, the rats were given free access to one of the reinforcers, a procedure known to reduce its value. It was found that the rats responded at a lower rate on the lever that had produced the now-devalued reinforcer, but that this effect was substantial only in rats that had received preexposure to the two reinforcers before instrumental training was begun (Experiment 1). Experiment 2 demonstrated that this effect was obtained only when presentations of the two reinforcers were presented according to an inter-mixed schedule during preexposure. It is suggested that this result constitutes an instance of the perceptual learning effect in which intermixed preexposure to similar events enhances their discriminability.     

Altering Reinforcer Variety or Intensity Changes the Within-Session Decrease in Responding

Operant responding often changes systematically within experimental sessions. McSweeney, Hinson, and Cannon (1996) argued that sensitization and habituation produce within-session changes in responding. The present study tested two predictions of the sensitization–habituation explanation. In two experiments, rats pressed a lever for reinforcers delivered by a multiple variable interval 15-s variable interval 15-s schedule. In Experiment 1, the variety of reinforcers delivered during the session was manipulated by varying the percentage of programmed reinforcers replaced with qualitatively different reinforcers from 0 to 75%, in five different conditions. In Experiment 2, the intensity of the reinforcer was manipulated by varying the concentration of sucrose in the sucrose and water solution used as the reinforcer from 0 to 30%, in five different conditions. Increasing the variety or the intensity of the reinforcers slowed the within-session decrease in responding. The results are consistent with the predictions of a sensitization–habituation explanation of within-session changes in responding.