Is induction produced by upcoming food-pellet reinforcement the outcome of an increase in overall activity or in operant responding?

Researchers have demonstrated that rats reliably increase their rates of pressing a lever for 1% liquid-sucrose reinforcement if they will soon have the opportunity to press a lever for food-pellet reinforcement. In the present experiments, the authors investigated if this increase in response rates occurred because the upcoming food pellets produced an increase in all behaviors (i.e., general arousal) or an increase in only the specific operant response (i.e., lever pressing). The results of Experiments 1 and 2 showed that the appearance of induction in rats' lever pressing for 1% sucrose reinforcement when food-pellet reinforcement was upcoming did not coincide with increases in the frequency of running in a wheel or making a nonreinforced nose-poke response. On the other hand, in Experiment 3, the authors found the appearance of induction coincided with increase nonreinforced lever presses on an adjacent lever. These results shed doubt on the idea that induction is a result of a general increase in all activity, and suggest instead that the increase in responding that occurs during induction is limited to the operant response.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

The effect of type of behavior on behavior change caused by type of upcoming food substance

Previous research suggests that rats will decrease their consumption of a low-valued substance if a high-valued one will soon be available (anticipatory contrast), but will increase their rate of operant responding for a low-valued substance if a high-valued one will soon be available (positive induction). The present experiments tested whether rats would increase their operant rate of licking or lever pressing for 1% liquid-sucrose reinforcement when 32% sucrose reinforcement was upcoming in the same session. Results indicated that upcoming 32% sucrose increased rates of lever pressing for 1% sucrose, but did not produce similar increases in rates of licking. In fact, upcoming 32% sucrose significantly reduced lick rates in Experiment 2. The present results suggest that the different changes in behavior may be linked to the specific response that the subjects must engage in to obtain the reward (i.e., licking vs. lever pressing), and not to the function of the behavior (i.e., consummatory vs. operant) or to how frequently the substances are available (i.e., continuously vs. intermittently).     

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.     

Making the sour sweet? Upcoming food-pellet reinforcement produces positive induction when rats press a lever for unsweetened lemon juice

Research has suggested that rats increase their response rate for a low-valued reinforcer when a high-valued reinforcer will soon be available (i.e., positive induction) because the value of the low-valued substance has increased. The present study tested if such a procedure could be used to increase rats’ responding for a non-reinforcing food. Rats pressed a lever for unsweetened lemon juice in the first half of a 50-min session and, in treatment conditions, for food pellets in the second half. Experiment 1 demonstrated that rates of responding for the lemon juice generally varied directly with the upcoming rate of food-pellet reinforcement and that responding in lemon juice-only sessions did not differ significantly from that observed during extinction. Experiment 2 demonstrated that rats consumed more lemon juice following a condition in which they were displaying positive induction than following a condition in which they only responded for lemon juice. The present results are consistent with the increase in value account of positive induction. More importantly, they may indicate that certain environmental conditions can increase food-directed behavior for a non-reinforcing food, a finding which may have implications for our understanding of eating behavior and dysfunctions (e.g., overeating).     

Concurrent ratio schedules: Fixed vs. variable response requirements

Rats were trained on concurrent fixed-ratio variable-ratio or concurrent fixed-ratio mixed-ratio schedules of food reinforcement. The variable-ratio schedule was composed of an arithmetic sequence of 11 ratios that averaged 50; the mixed-ratio schedule consisted of equiprobable ratios of 1 and 99. Fixed-ratio values, varied over experimental conditions, included 25, 35, 50, 60, and 99. The proportion of responses and time allocated to the variable- or mixed-ratio schedule increased as the size of the fixed ratio increased. For most subjects, higher proportions of responses and time were maintained on the fixed-ratio schedule at fixed-ratio values of 25 and 35; higher proportions of responses and time were maintained on the variable- or mixed-ratio schedule at fixed-ratio values of 50 or higher. On concurrent variable-ratio fixed-ratio schedules, the tendency for responding to be maintained exclusively by one schedule was related to the difference in local reinforcement rates obtained from those schedules. Exclusive responding was approximated when the difference in local reinforcement rates obtained from those schedules was large; responding was more evenly distributed between the schedules as the difference in the rates at which reinforcement was obtained from each decreased.     

Fixed-ratio punishment by timeout of concurrent variable-interval behavior

Pigeons' responding was maintained by two concurrently available variable-interval reinforcement schedules. A fixed-ratio punishment schedule of timeout periods from the concurrent reinforcement schedules was arranged for responding during one of the variable-interval schedules. The greater the probability of a timeout after a response on the punished variable-interval schedule (the smaller the fixed ratio that produced timeout), the greater the decline in the relative punished response rates. Relative reinforcement rates remained invariant when relative response rates declined. Both behavioral contrast and induction effects were observed on the unpunished variable-interval schedule as a function of timeout punishment of the other schedule.     

Multiple determinants of the effects of reinforcement magnitude on free-operant response rates

Four experiments examined the effects of increasing the number of food pellets given to hungry rats for a lever-press response. On a simple variable-interval 60-s schedule, increased number of pellets depressed response rates (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2, the decrease in response rate as a function of increased reinforcement magnitude was demonstrated on a variable-interval 30-s schedule, but enhanced rates of response were obtained with the same increase in reinforcement magnitude on a variable-ratio 30 schedule. In Experiment 3, higher rates of responding were maintained by the component of a concurrent variable-interval 60-s variable-interval 60-s schedule associated with a higher reinforcement magnitude. In Experiment 4, higher rates of response were produced in the component of a multiple variable-interval 60-s variable-interval 60-s schedule associated with the higher reinforcement magnitude. It is suggested that on simple schedules greater reinforcer magnitudes shape the reinforced pattern of responding more effectively than do smaller reinforcement magnitudes. This effect is, however, overridden by another process, such a contrast, when two magnitudes are presented within a single session on two-component schedules.     

Local rates of responding and reinforcement during concurrent schedules

The literature was searched for information about the local rates of responding and reinforcement during concurrent schedules. The local rates of reinforcement obtained from the two components of a concurrent schedule were equal when a long-duration changeover delay was used and when many sessions were conducted, except when the two components provided different simple schedules. The local rates of responding were equal under some conditions, but they differed when one component provided a ratio and the other an interval schedule. Across schedules, local rates of reinforcement changed with changes in the schedule of reinforcement. Local rates of responding did not change with changes in change-over-delay duration but did with changes in the changeover ratio and with changes in the programmed rates of reinforcement. The results generally conform to the Equalizing and Melioration Principles and help to clarify current statements of the Matching Law. The results also suggest that changes in the local rates of responding and reinforcement may be orderly across schedules.     

CONCURRENT RESURGENCE AND BEHAVIORAL HISTORY

The contribution of past experiences to concurrent resurgence was investigated in three experiments. In Experiment 1, resurgence was related to the length of reinforcement history as well as the reinforcement schedule that previously maintained responding. Specifically, more resurgence occurred when key pecks had been reinforced on a variable-interval 1-min schedule than a variable-interval 6-min schedule, but this effect may have been due either to the differential reinforcement rates or differential response rates under the two schedules. When reinforcement rates were similar (Experiment 2), there was more resurgence of high-rate than low-rate responding. When response rates were similar (Experiment 3), resurgence was not related systematically to prior reinforcement rates. Taken together, these three experimental tests of concurrent resurgence illustrate that prior response rates are better predictors of resurgence than are prior reinforcement rates.     

Local patterns of responding maintained by concurrent and multiple schedules

Local patterns of responding were studied when pigeons pecked for food in concurrent variable-interval schedules (Experiment I) and in multiple variable-interval schedules (Experiment II). In Experiment I, similarities in the distribution of interresponse times on the two keys provided further evidence that responding on concurrent schedules is determined more by allocation of time than by changes in local pattern of responding. Relative responding in local intervals since a preceding reinforcement showed consistent deviations from matching between relative responding and relative reinforcement in various postreinforcement intervals. Response rates in local intervals since a preceding changeover showed that rate of responding is not the same on both keys in all postchangeover intervals. The relative amount of time consumed by interchangeover times of a given duration approximately matched relative frequency of reinforced interchangeover times of that duration. However, computer simulation showed that this matching was probably a necessary artifact of concurrent schedules. In Experiment II, when component durations were 180 sec, the relationship between distribution of interresponse times and rate of reinforcement in the component showed that responding was determined by local pattern of responding in the components. Since responding on concurrent schedules appears to be determined by time allocation, this result would establish a behavioral difference between multiple and concurrent schedules. However, when component durations were 5 sec, local pattern of responding in a component (defined by interresponse times) was less important in determining responding than was amount of time spent responding in a component (defined by latencies). In fact, with 5-sec component durations, the relative amount of time spent responding in a component approximately matched relative frequency of reinforcement in the component. Thus, as component durations in multiple schedules decrease, multiple schedules become more like concurrent schedules, in the sense that responding is affected by allocation of time rather than by local pattern of responding.     

Within-session Changes In Responding During Concurrent Variable-interval Schedules

Five rats and 4 pigeons responded for food delivered by several concurrent variable-interval schedules. The sum of the rates of reinforcement programmed for the two components varied from 15 to 480 reinforcers per hour in different conditions. Rates of responding usually changed within the experimental session in a similar manner for the two components of each concurrent schedule. The within-session changes were similar to previously reported changes during simple schedules that provided rates of reinforcement equal to the sum of all reinforcers obtained from the concurrent schedules. The number of changeovers also changed within sessions in a manner similar to the changes in instrumental responding. These results suggest that changeovers are governed by the same variables that govern instrumental responding. They also suggest that the within-session change in responding during each component of a concurrent schedule is determined by approximately the sum of the reinforcers obtained from both components when both components provide the same type of reinforcer.     

Variable-ratio schedules of timeout from avoidance: effects of d-amphetamine and morphine.

Rats were trained on concurrent schedules in which pressing one lever postponed shock and pressing the other lever produced periods of signaled timeout from avoidance on variable-ratio schedules. These procedures generated high rates of timeout-reinforced responding and provided a baseline for studying the effects of drugs on behavior maintained by different types of negative reinforcement (shock postponement vs. timeout). Morphine (2.5 to 10.0 mg/kg) reduced behavior maintained by timeout at doses that increased or had no effect on avoidance responding. In contrast, d-amphetamine (0.125 to 2.0 mg/kg) produced large increases in timeout responding at doses that had minimal effect on avoidance in rats trained on variable-interval and variable-ratio schedules. Thus, the event-dependent effects of morphine, observed in previous studies in which timeout responding was maintained at low rates by interval schedules, were replicated with high timeout rates maintained by variable-ratio schedules. The effects of d-amphetamine could also be described as "event dependent" because timeout responding was stimulated more than avoidance regardless of the maintenance schedule or baseline rate.     

AN EVALUATION OF THE INTERACTION BETWEEN QUALITY OF ATTENTION AND NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT WITH CHILDREN WHO DISPLAY ESCAPE‐MAINTAINED PROBLEM BEHAVIOR

The choice‐making behavior of 2 typically developing children who engaged in problem behavior maintained by negative reinforcement was evaluated within a concurrent‐operants assessment that varied the quality of attention across free‐play and demand conditions. The results demonstrated that it was possible to bias responding towards academic demands for both participants by providing high‐quality attention, despite the continuous availability of negative reinforcement. The current study extended brief clinical methods with typically developing children and demonstrated how different qualities of attention provided across concurrent schedules could bias responding.     

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

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

The effect of conditioned reinforcement rate on choice: a review

We review the nature of conditioned reinforcement, including evidence that conditioned reinforcers maintain choice behavior in concurrent schedules and that they elevate responding in the terminal links of concurrent‐chains schedules. A question has resurfaced recently: Do theories of choice in concurrent‐chains schedules need to include a term reflecting greater preference for higher rates of conditioned reinforcement? The review of several studies addressing this point suggests that such a term is inappropriate. Elevated rates of conditioned reinforcement (and responding) in the terminal links of concurrent‐chains schedules do not lead to greater preference in the initial link leading to the higher rate of conditioned reinforcement. If anything, the opposite preference is likely to occur. This result is not surprising, since the additional putative conditioned reinforcers in the terminal link are not correlated with a reduction in time to primary reinforcement nor with an increase in value.