Exchange schedules in token economies: A preliminary investigation of second‐order schedule effects

Basic research shows that token‐production and exchange‐production schedules in token economies affect each other as second‐order schedules (i.e., the exchange‐production schedule's requirements affect responding toward the token‐production schedule). This relationship has not been investigated with children in academic settings despite the widespread use of token economies in this context. This study compared the effects of fixed‐ratio (FR) and variable‐ratio (VR) exchange‐production schedules of equal ratios (2, 5, and 10) on responding toward an FR 1 token‐production schedule with a child diagnosed with autism. A concurrent chains assessment was also conducted to assess the participant's relative preference for FR and VR exchange‐production schedule arrangements within her typical discrete trial training. Results showed no difference in response rate between the two schedule types. However, the concurrent chains assessment revealed an exclusive preference for the VR arrangement.     

Varying reinforcement magnitude on interval schedules

In Experiment 1, rats were trained on either a random-interval or a variable-interval 60-sec schedule of reinforcement, and reinforcement magnitude was varied across conditions between one and four pellets. Although the two schedules maintained different patterns of behaviour, patterns and rates of responding were not systematically affected by the variation in reinforcement magnitude. In Experiment 2, a regulated probability interval schedule that generated similar rates of reinforcement to those of the schedules of Experiment 1 was used, with the pattern of behaviour generated resembling that typical of a random-interval schedule. Changing reinforcement magnitude again produced few systematic changes in behaviour. In Experiment 3, a variable-ratio schedule was used within a procedure that otherwise resembled that of Experiments 1 and 2. Increasing the reinforcement magnitude now decreased the rates of responding, and examination of the patterns of responding showed that this came about because rates of responding were higher early in the interreinforcer interval in the one-pellet condition. These experiments demonstrate the insensitivity of behaviour under interval schedules to changes in reinforcement magnitude and suggest the operation of mechanisms different from those engaged by ratio schedules and discretetrial learning procedures.     

A comparison of token and tandem schedules of reinforcement on response patterns for adolescents with autism

Token schedules of reinforcement are ubiquitous in clinical settings, yet little research has thoroughly evaluated the effects of token schedules on responding in clinical settings. Basic research has shown token schedules of reinforcement produce lower response rates and larger pre‐ratio pauses compared to tandem schedules. The purpose of the current study was to determine whether the same effects are produced with adolescents with autism or related disorders. We examined response patterns under otherwise identical FR token and FR tandem schedules. Tokens suppressed responding for one participant only under high schedule values and for a second participant under common clinical schedule values; no difference in responding occurred between token and tandem schedules for two participants. These results support the systematic evaluation of token schedules of reinforcement in clinical settings. Additional applied research is needed on token schedules to further our understanding of the underlying mechanisms that contribute to the overall effectiveness of token economies.     

A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF FIXED AND VARIABLE RATIO SCHEDULES OF REINFORCEMENT ON THE BEHAVIOR OF DEAF CHILDREN

The performance of all five students in an adjustment class for deaf children was compared under fixed and variable ratio schedules of reinforcement. During the fixed ratio (FR) condition, students earned checks if they were attentive and did not engage in disruptive behavior. These checks could be exchanged for the opportunity to draw a prize from a grab bag. During the variable ratio (VR) condition, they earned a draw from the grab bag according to a variable ratio schedule with a mean ratio equal to the value of the preceding FR schedule. During the VR condition, students visually attended more and engaged in disruptive behavior less often than during the FR condition. The number of math problems completed per minute was also higher during the VR condition although no specific consequences were applied to math performance.     

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.     

INFLUENCES ON COCAINE TOLERANCE ASSESSED UNDER A MULTIPLE CONJUNCTIVE SCHEDULE OF REINFORCEMENT

Under multiple schedules of reinforcement, previous research has generally observed tolerance to the rate‐decreasing effects of cocaine that has been dependent on schedule‐parameter size in the context of fixed‐ratio (FR) schedules, but not under the context of fixed‐interval (FI) schedules of reinforcement. The current experiment examined the effects of cocaine on key‐pecking responses of White Carneau pigeons maintained under a three‐component multiple conjunctive FI (10 s, 30 s, & 120 s) FR (5 responses) schedule of food presentation. Dose‐effect curves representing the effects of presession cocaine on responding were assessed in the context of (1) acute administration of cocaine (2) chronic administration of cocaine and (3) daily administration of saline. Chronic administration of cocaine generally resulted in tolerance to the response‐rate decreasing effects of cocaine, and that tolerance was generally independent of relative FI value, as measured by changes in ED50 values. Daily administration of saline decreased ED50 values to those observed when cocaine was administered acutely. The results show that adding a FR requirement to FI schedules is not sufficient to produce schedule‐parameter‐specific tolerance. Tolerance to cocaine was generally independent of FI‐parameter under the present conjunctive schedules, indicating that a ratio requirement, per se, is not sufficient for tolerance to be dependent on FI parameter.     

Exclusive preference develops less readily on concurrent ratio schedules with wheel-running than with sucrose reinforcement

Previous research suggested that allocation of responses on concurrent schedules of wheel‐running reinforcement was less sensitive to schedule differences than typically observed with more conventional reinforcers. To assess this possibility, 16 female Long Evans rats were exposed to concurrent FR FR schedules of reinforcement and the schedule value on one alternative was systematically increased. In one condition, the reinforcer on both alternatives was .1 ml of 7.5% sucrose solution; in the other, it was a 30‐s opportunity to run in a wheel. Results showed that the average ratio at which greater than 90% of responses were allocated to the unchanged alternative was higher with wheel‐running reinforcement. As the ratio requirement was initially increased, responding strongly shifted toward the unchanged alternative with sucrose, but not with wheel running. Instead, responding initially increased on both alternatives, then subsequently shifted toward the unchanged alternative. Furthermore, changeover responses as a percentage of total responses decreased with sucrose, but not wheel‐running reinforcement. Finally, for some animals, responding on the increasing ratio alternative decreased as the ratio requirement increased, but then stopped and did not decline with further increments. The implications of these results for theories of choice are discussed.     

Response persistence under ratio and interval reinforcement schedules

In Experiment 1, rats were exposed to progressive-ratio schedules of food reinforcement while other rats were exposed simultaneously to yoked-interval schedules that arranged equivalent interreinforcer intervals but required only a single response at the end of the interval for food delivery. In Experiment 2, a within-subject yoked-control procedure was employed in which pigeons were exposed to alternating sessions (one per day) of progressive-ratio schedules and yoked-interval schedules as described above. In both experiments, responding under the yoked-interval schedule persisted beyond the point at which responding under the progressive-ratio schedule had ceased. The progressive-ratio schedules controlled break-and-run distributions, and the yoked-interval schedules controlled more even distributions of responses in time. Response rates decreased and postreinforcement pauses increased over time within individual sessions under both schedules. The results suggest that responding maintained by interval schedules is more persistent than that maintained by ratio schedules. The limitations and implications of this conclusion are discussed in the context of other investigations of response strength and behavioral momentum.     

AGGRESSION AS POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT IN MICE UNDER VARIOUS RATIO‐ AND TIME‐BASED REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULES

There is evidence suggesting aggression may be a positive reinforcer in many species. However, only a few studies have examined the characteristics of aggression as a positive reinforcer in mice. Four types of reinforcement schedules were examined in the current experiment using male Swiss CFW albino mice in a resident—intruder model of aggression as a positive reinforcer. A nose poke response on an operant conditioning panel was reinforced under fixed‐ratio (FR 8), fixed‐interval (FI 5‐min), progressive ratio (PR 2), or differential reinforcement of low rate behavior reinforcement schedules (DRL 40‐s and DRL 80‐s). In the FR conditions, nose pokes were maintained by aggression and extinguished when the aggression contingency was removed. There were long postreinforcement pauses followed by bursts of responses with short interresponse times (IRTs). In the FI conditions, nose pokes were maintained by aggression, occurred more frequently as the interval elapsed, and extinguished when the contingency was removed. In the PR conditions, nose pokes were maintained by aggression, postreinforcement pauses increased as the ratio requirement increased, and responding was extinguished when the aggression contingency was removed. In the DRL conditions, the nose poke rate decreased, while the proportional distributions of IRTs and postreinforcement pauses shifted toward longer durations as the DRL interval increased. However, most responses occurred before the minimum IRT interval elapsed, suggesting weak temporal control of behavior. Overall, the findings suggest aggression can be a positive reinforcer for nose poke responses in mice on ratio‐ and time‐based reinforcement schedules.     

Drug discrimination under concurrent variable-ratio variable-ratio schedules

Pigeons were trained to discriminate 5 mg/kg pentobarbital from saline under concurrent variable-ratio (VR) VR schedules, in which responses on the pentobarbital-biased lever were reinforced under the VR schedule with the smaller response requirements when pentobarbital was given before the session, and responses on the saline-biased key were reinforced under the VR schedule with the larger response requirements. When saline was administered before the session, the reinforcement contingencies associated with the two response keys were reversed. When responding stabilized under concurrent VR 20 VR 30, concurrent VR 10 VR 40, or concurrent VR 5 VR 50 schedules, pigeons responded almost exclusively on the key on which fewer responses were required to produce the reinforcer. When other doses of pentobarbital and other drugs were substituted for the training dose, low doses of all drugs produced responding on the saline-biased key. Higher doses of pentobarbital and chlordiazepoxide produced responding only on the pentobarbital-biased key, whereas higher doses of ethanol and phencyclidine produced responding only on this key less often. d-Amphetamine produced responding primarily on the saline-biased key. When drugs generalized to pentobarbital, the shape of the generalization curve under concurrent VR VR schedules was more often graded than quantal in shape. Thus, drug discrimination can be established under concurrent VR VR schedules, but the shapes of drug-discrimination dose-response curves under concurrent VR VR schedules more closely resemble those seen under interval schedules than those seen under fixed-ratio schedules. Graded dose-response curves under concurrent VR VR schedules may relate to probability matching and difficulty in discriminating differences in reinforcement frequency.     

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: II. Performance on fixed-ratio schedules of mutual reinforcement

Coordinated responses of 5 dyads of rats were investigated under fixed-ratio (FR) schedules of mutual water reinforcement. Coordinated responding was defined as 2 consecutive lever-presses, 1 from each of 2 rats, occurring <.5 s apart. In the FR schedules, each coordinated episode was defined as 1 response in the FR sequence. The size of FR schedules was parametrically manipulated assuming the values of FR 1, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 50, and 9, in this order. Each FR remained in effect until responding reached stability. Under all conditions, pairs of rats received access to water simultaneously (mutual reinforcement). Rates and proportions of coordinated responding showed a bitonic inverted U-shaped function of ratio size. Postreinforcement pauses increased systematically as the interreinforcement interval increased. Local rates and proportions increased as a function of response location within ratios. Results of a control condition with relaxed temporal constraints for mutual reinforcement showed decreases in rates and proportion of coordinated responses, suggesting that the coordinated responses were controlled by the mutual reinforcement contingencies. The present experiment showed that coordinated responding is quantitatively affected by 3 properties of FR schedules: response requirement, reinforcement rates, and proximity to reinforcement.     

Interlocking schedules: the relationship between response and time requirements.

Rats were exposed to an interlocking fixed-ratio 150 fixed-interval 5-minute schedule of food reinforcement and then to yoked variable-ratio schedules in which individual ratios corresponded exactly to the ratios of responses to reinforcement obtained on the interlocking schedule. After additional training with the interlocking schedule, the rats were exposed to yoked variable-interval schedules in which intervals corresponded to the intervals between successive reinforcements obtained on the second interlocking schedule. Response rates were highest in the yoked VR condition and lowest in the yoked VI, while intermediate rates characterized the interlocking schedule. Break-run patterns of responding were generated by the interlocking schedule for all subjects, while both the yoked VR and VI schedules produced comparatively stable local rates of responding. These results indicate that responding is sensitive to the interlocking schedule's inverse relationship between reinforcement frequency and responses per reinforcement.     

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.     

Competitive fixed-interval performance in humans

Two persons responded in the same session in separate cubicles, but under a single schedule of reinforcement. Each time reinforcement was programmed, only the first response to occur, that is, the response of only one of the subjects, was reinforced. “Competitive” behavior that developed under these conditions was examined in three experiments. In Experiment 1 subjects responded under fixed-interval (FI) 30-s, 60-s, and 90-s schedules of reinforcement. Under the competition condition, relative to baseline conditions, the response rates were higher and the pattern was “break-and-run.” In Experiment 2, subjects were exposed first to a conventional FI schedule and then to an FI competition schedule. Next, they were trained to respond under either a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) or fixed-ratio (FR) schedule, and finally, the initial FI competition condition was reinstated. In this second exposure to the FI competition procedure, DRL subjects responded at lower rates than were emitted during the initial exposure to that condition and FR subjects responded at higher rates. For all subjects, however, responding gradually returned to the break-and-run pattern that had occurred during the first FI competition condition. Experiment 3 assessed potential variables contributing to the effects of the competitive FI contingencies during Experiments 1 and 2. Subjects were exposed to FI schedules where (a) probability of reinforcement at completion of each fixed interval was varied, or (b) a limited hold was in effect for reinforcement. Only under the limited hold was responding similar to that observed in previous experiments.     

The long-term effect of high- and low-rate responding histories on fixed-interval responding in rats

Tell rats were given extended lever-press training on a fixed-interval (FI) 30-s food reinforcement schedule from the outset or following exposure to one or two previous reinforcement schedules. For 4 rats the previots schedule was either fixed-ratio 20, which generated high response rates, or differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 20 s, which produced low response rates. For 4 additional rats the extended training on FI 30 s was preceded by experience with two schedules: fixed-ratio 20 followed by differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 20 s; or the same two schedules in the reverse order. Fixed-interval response rates were initially affected by the immediately preceding schedule, but after 80 to 100 sessions, all traces of prior schedule history had disappeared. The results also showed no long-term effect of schedule history on the interfood-interval patterns of responding on the FI 30-s schedule. These results support one of the most central tenets of the experimental analysis of behavior: control by the immediate consequences of 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.     

Assessing reinforcers under progressive schedule requirements.

Recent research findings suggest that reinforcing stimuli may be differentially effective as response requirements increase. We extended this line of research by evaluating responding under increasing schedule requirements via progressive‐ratio schedules and behavioral economic analyses. The differential effectiveness of preferred stimuli in treating destructive behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement also was examined. Results showed that one of two stimuli was associated with more responding under increasing schedule requirements for the 4 participants. Furthermore, stimuli associated with more responding under increasing schedule requirements generally were more effective in treating destructive behavior than stimuli associated with less responding. These data suggest that progressive‐ratio schedules and behavioral economic analyses may be useful for developing a new technology for reinforcer identification. From a clinical perspective, these results suggest that two reinforcers may be similarly effective for low‐effort tasks and differentially effective for high‐effort tasks.     

SINGLE‐SAMPLE DISCRIMINATION OF DIFFERENT SCHEDULES' REINFORCED INTERRESPONSE TIMES

Food‐deprived rats in Experiment 1 responded to one of two tandem schedules that were, with equal probability, associated with a sample lever. The tandem schedules' initial links were different random‐interval schedules. Their values were adjusted to approximate equality in time to completing each tandem schedule's response requirements. The tandem schedules differed in their terminal links: One reinforced short interresponse times; the other reinforced long ones. Tandem‐schedule completion presented two comparison levers, one of which was associated with each tandem schedule. Pressing the lever associated with the sample‐lever tandem schedule produced a food pellet. Pressing the other produced a blackout. The difference between terminal‐link reinforced interresponse times varied across 10‐trial blocks within a session. Conditional‐discrimination accuracy increased with the size of the temporal difference between terminal‐link reinforced interresponse times. In Experiment 2, one tandem schedule was replaced by a random ratio, while the comparison schedule was either a tandem schedule that only reinforced long interresponse times or a random‐interval schedule. Again, conditional‐discrimination accuracy increased with the temporal difference between the two schedules' reinforced interresponse times. Most rats mastered the discrimination between random ratio and random interval, showing that the interresponse times reinforced by these schedules can serve to discriminate between these schedules.     

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.