Discrimination and emission of temporal intervals by pigeons

Because the frequency distribution of IRTs showed little or no control by a DRL schedule, the schedule was modified so that the pigeon's behavior after each IRT would indicate whether or not it had discriminated the duration of the IRT. After every two pecks on a red key, the key changed to blue for 30 sec. Then it automatically became red again. Pecks on the blue key were reinforced with food on a VI schedule only when the preceding IRT on the red key had been longer than 18 sec. The birds did not selectively emit longer IRTs on the red key: the value of IRTs/op did not increase with IRT duration. However, they did discriminate the duration of the IRT emitted on the red key: the rate of pecking on the blue key was an increasing function of the duration of the preceding IRT on the red key.     

Temporal regulation of children with autism spectrum disorder exposed to a differential-reinforcement-of low-rates schedule

This study investigated temporal adjustment of children with autism spectrum disorder under a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rates (DRL) schedule. Sixteen participants, aged 3.2 to 7 years, were exposed to two conditions, DRL 5 s and DRL 20 s. Children participated in 7 sessions in each condition, except for 1 participant who attained the adjustment criteria in the DRL 5-s schedule. Temporal adjustment was measured with the proportion of reinforced interresponse times (IRTs) and the mean IRT. The operant response was a press on a touch screen and the reinforcers were cartoons. IQ and receptive language were measured prior to the DRL sessions. Results showed that the mean proportion of reinforced IRTs was slightly higher in the DRL 5-s schedule. The mean IRT was above the IRT requirement in both conditions. However, substantial individual variability was observed. Children with higher IQ and receptive language scores presented a greater proportion of reinforced IRTs in both conditions. Moreover, participants who adjusted their responses to the DRL 5-s schedule were more likely to adjust responding to the DRL 20-s schedule. This suggests that some children might be more sensitive to reinforcement contingencies than others. This study points at future research in the field of timing in children.     

On the primacy of molecular processes in determining response rates under variable-ratio and variable-interval schedules

This study focused on variables that may account for response-rate differences under variable-ratio (VR) and variable-interval (VI) schedules of reinforcement. Four rats were exposed to VR, VI, tandem VI differential-reinforcement-of-high-rate, regulated-probability-interval, and negative-feedback schedules of reinforcement that provided the same rate of reinforcement. Response rates were higher under the VR schedule than the VI schedule, and the rates on all other schedules approximated those under the VR schedule. The median reinforced interresponse time (IRT) under the VI schedule was longer than for the other schedules. Thus, differences in reinforced IRTs correlated with differences in response rate, an outcome suggestive of the molecular control of response rate. This conclusion was complemented by the additional finding that the differences in molar reinforcement-feedback functions had little discernible impact on responding.     

Operant behavior and the galvanic skin potential under DRL schedule

Motor and galvanic skin potential (GSP) activity were investigated during the conditioning, extinction, and reconditioning of motor responses under a differential reinforcement of low rate (DRL) schedule of reinforcement. Interresponse time (IRT) distributions for motor responses during conditioning and reconditioning gradually stabilized at a peak just beyond the minimal IRT required for reinforcement. Few unreinforced motor responses and "bursts" of motor responses were observed during conditioning and reconditioning. Relative to conditioning and reconditioning, extinction effected larger IRTs and smaller GSP amplitudes. GSP amplitudes were greater for unreinforced than for reinforced motor responses during conditioning and reconditioning. However, GSP amplitudes associated with the unreinforced extinction responses were smaller than either the reinforced or unreinforced responses during conditioning and reconditioning.     

The role of reinforcement in controlling sequential IRT dependencies

Sequential dependencies were investigated with two rats in a mixed and in a tandem differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate-responding schedule. In each schedule, 5-sec and 15-sec components were presented in fixed alternation. In the mixed schedule, a 5-sec interresponse time followed a 15-sec interresponse time and a 15-sec interresponse time followed a 5-sec interresponse time in predictable sequence. The correlation between prior and subsequent interresponse times, however, existed only when the prior interresponse time resulted in reinforcement. In the tandem schedule, an interresponse time greater than 5 sec in the differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 5-sec component was not associated directly with reinforcement. One subject demonstrated sequential response patterns similar to those noted in the mixed schedule, even though the prior 5-sec interresponse time was not reinforced in the tandem schedule. The results indicate that the prior interresponse time length alone is not sufficient to influence the subsequent interresponse time length. Implications are, however, that a temporal response pattern arises when an interresponse interacts with schedule contingencies to control the interreinforcement interval.     

The distribution of interresponse times in the pigeon during variable-interval reinforcement

Three pigeons' pecks were reinforced on 1- and 2-min variable-interval schedules, and frequency distributions of their interresponse times (IRTs) were recorded. The conditional probability that a response would fall into any IRT category was estimated by the interresponse-times-per-opportunity transformation (IRTs/op). The resulting functions were notable chiefly for the relatively low probability of IRTs in the 0.2- to 0.3-sec range; in other respects they varied within and between subjects. The overall level of the curves generally rose over the course of 32 experimental hours, but their shapes changed unsystematically. The shape of the IRT distribution was much the same for VI 1-min and VI 2-min. The variability of these distributions supports the notion that the VI schedule only loosely controls response rate, permitting wide latitude to adventitious effects. There was no systematic evidence that curves changed over sessions to conform to the distribution of reinforcements by IRT.     

Quantitative Analysis of IRT Variability During the First Training Stages of a Variable-Interval Schedule in Rats

Five rats were reinforced under variable-interval schedules with different average interreinforcement intervals (30 seC., 1 min, 2 min, and 4 min). Each animal was run only two sessions of each schedule. The interresponse times (IRTs) were recorded and analyzed. The autocorrelation function of the IRT series and of the IRT time series (number of responses per time interval) were calculated, and absence of periodicity in the subject’s behavior was demonstrated. Frequency distribution of IRTs showed in all cases a similar shape and could be fitted to a gamma probability density function in 60% of cases with a signification level of .01 (Kolmogorov-Smirnoff test). The frequency distributions of the IRT time series were distributed as a Poisson process with a .05 significance level. These results suggest that during variable-interval schedules the responses of the animal can be modeled as a random process characterized by a gamma distribution, as a first approximation.

     

The microanalysis of fixed-interval responding

The fixed-interval schedule of reinforcement is one of the more widely studied schedules in the experimental analysis of behavior and is also a common baseline for behavior pharmacology. Despite many intensive studies, the controlling variables and the pattern of behavior engendered are not well understood. The present study examined the microstructure and superstructure of the behavior engendered by a fixed-interval 5- and a fixed-interval 15-minute schedule of food reinforcement in the pigeon. Analysis of performance typical of fixed-interval responding indicated that the scalloped pattern does not result from smooth acceleration in responding, but, rather, from renewed pausing early in the interval. Individual interresponse-time (IRT) analyses provided no evidence of acceleration. There was a strong indication of alternation in shorter-longer IRTs, but these shorter-longer IRTs did not occur at random, reflecting instead a sequential dependency in successive IRTs. Furthermore, early in the interval there was a high relative frequency of short IRTs. Such a pattern of early pauses and short IRTs does not suggest behavior typical of reinforced responding as exemplified by the pattern found near the end of the interval. Thus, behavior from clearly scalloped performance can be classified into three states: postreinforcement pause, interim behavior, and terminal 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.     

Effects of a delay-reinforcement procedure on performance under IRT>t schedules

Water-deprived rats were studied under a compound schedule that prescribed that responses terminating interresponse times (IRTs) greater than a fixed value t₁ (IRT > t₁ component schedule) initiated a delay of reinforcement interval t₂, at the end of which water was presented if the subject did not respond ( > t₂ component schedule). If the subject responded before the t₂ interval elapsed, the IRT > t₁ component schedule was re-initiated and water was not presented. The IRT > t₁ and > t₂ component schedules were not differentially correlated with distinctive stimuli. Rate of responding during the IRT > t₁ component decreased as a function of the value of t₂. The magnitude of the decreases in response rate appeared to be proportional to the subject's rate under the IRT > t schedule with no delay of reinforcement (t₂ = 0 sec). The effects were independent of the parameter value of the IRT > t₁ component schedule and of the rate of reinforcement. The results suggested that “efficiency” of performance under IRT > t schedules can be increased by appropriately arranging brief delays of reinforcement.     

Control over response number by a targeted percentile schedule: reinforcement loss and the acute effects of d-amphetamine.

Two fixed-consecutive-number-like procedures were used to examine effects of acute d-amphetamine administration on control over response number. In both procedures, rats were required to press the left lever at least once and then press the right lever to complete a trial. The consecutive left-lever presses on each trial comprised a "run." Under the targeted percentile schedule, reinforcement was provided if the current run length was closer to the target length (16) than half of the most recent 24 runs. This differentially reinforced run length while holding reinforcement probability constant at .5. A second group acquired the differentiation under the targeted percentile schedule, but were then shifted to a procedure that yoked reinforcement probability by subject and run length to that obtained under the targeted percentile schedule. The two procedures generated practically identical control run lengths, response rates, reinforcement probabilities, and reinforcement rates. Administration of d-amphetamine disrupted percentile responding to a greater degree than yoked control responding. This disruption decreased reinforcement frequency less in the former than the latter procedure. The similar baseline responding under these two procedures suggests that this difference in sensitivity was due to behavioral adjustments to drug prompted by reduction of reinforcement density in the yoked control but not the percentile schedule. These adjustments attenuate the drug's effects under the former, but not the latter, procedure.     

Effects of a DRL contingency added to a fixed-interval reinforcement schedule

Following 30 days of reinforcement for the bar press response of two white rats on 30-sec fixed-interval (FI), a DRL component was added so that a minimal interresponse time (IRT) for the reinforced response, in addition to the FI variable, was necessary for reinforcement. Marked control over response rate by the superimposed DRL requirement was demonstrated by an inverse hyperbolic function as the DRL component was increased from 1 to 24 sec within the constant 30-sec FI interval. Interresponse time and post-reinforcement (post-S^R) “break” distributions taken at one experimental point (DRL = 24 sec) suggested that a more precise temporal discrimination was initiated by an S^R than by a response, since the relative frequency of a sequence of two reinforced responses appeared greater than that of a sequence of a non-reinforced response followed by a reinforced one. This latter finding was confirmed with new animals in a follow-up experiment employing a conventional 24-sec DRL schedule.     

Sequential patterns in post-reinforcement pauses on fixed-interval schedules of food

Responding by one pigeon was reinforced with food on fixed-interval schedules of 30, 60, and 300 sec duration. A second pigeon was studied under fixed-interval durations of 60 and 300 sec. For both birds, the average post-reinforcement pause was one-half the duration of the fixed interval. Autocorrelation coefficients revealed first-order sequential dependencies in series of post-reinforcement pauses. On the 300-sec fixed-interval schedule, successive post-reinforcement tended to alternate between long and short durations. At the shorter fixed-interval durations there was less evidence of alternation sequences. A second experiment was conducted to determine if the time intervals between the first response after reinforcement and the next reinforcement (the work periods) were responsible for the alternation patterns in the series of post-reinforcement pauses. To evaluate the role of the work period, several procedures were used to modify the work period from that obtained on the fixed-interval 300-sec schedule. Adding a schedule to the fixed-interval schedule that set the minimum amount of time that could elapse between the first response after reinforcement and the next reinforcement eliminated the alternation pattern. Control schedules indicated that the elimination of alternation patterns resulted from constraints on the work period per se and not from confounded changes in the interreinforcement intervals.     

Differential reinforcement of interresponse times with controlled probability of reinforcement per response

Pigeons were presented food after interresponse times (IRTs) longer or shorter than a fixed percentage of their most recent IRTs. This procedure controlled probability of reinforcement per response while still allowing different classes of IRTs to be reinforced differentially. Support was found for IRT-reinforcement theory in that response rates were determined by the degree and direction of differential reinforcement of IRTs, but were relatively independent of probability of reinforcement per response and of the length of the control system's IRT memory. Stimulus control of these differential response rates was also demonstrated.     

Tables of event sequences for sequential analyses of data in psychological experiments containing two-class events

Tables of sequences of two-class events are presented for use in programming psychological experiments in which behavior on trial n may be a function of the events of trials n ? 1, n ? 2, and/or n ? 3. Various factors related to schedule generation are discussed, i.e., restrictions on trial-block length which accompany sequential balance, interrelationships of trial blocks in the multiblock experiment, relationships between run length and r-tuple occurrences, and alternation behavior. Following a consideration of various methods of schedule generation for the two-class experiment, it was concluded that no method can result in schedules that possess all properties considered desirable in psychological experiments. However, the present sequences allow for sequential balance and analysis, and thus should prove useful in producing schedules in some contexts that are standard with regard to sequential influences.     

Stimulus control of differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate responding

Five pigeons were given single-stimulus training on an 8-sec differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule followed by steady-state generalization training using 12 wavelength stimuli. Three birds had a high percentage of reinforced responses on the training schedule and flat generalization gradients of total responses. The birds with fewer reinforced responses had much steeper generalization gradients. Generalization gradients plotted as a function of both stimulus wavelength and interresponse time showed that for most birds, stimulus control was restricted to responses with long interresponse times. Responses with very short interresponse times were not under stimulus control and there was some evidence of inhibitory control of short interresponse times. Interresponse-times-per-opportunity functions, plotted as a function of stimulus wavelength, showed that stimulus wavelength controlled the temporal distribution of responses, rather than the overall rate of response. The data indicate that the differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule generates several response categories that are controlled in different ways by wavelength and time-correlated stimuli, and that averaging responses regardless of interresponse-time length obscures this control.     

Response patterning during stimulus generalization in the rat

Nine rats were trained to bar press in the presence of a clicking sound of 6.67 cps (S(D)) for 1-min variable-interval food reinforcement randomly alternated with a clicking sound of 20 cps (S(Delta)) signifying extinction. After a criterion of 90% of total responses in the presence of the S(D) was obtained, a generalization test was administered, including values of 6.67, 10.00, 13.33, and 20.00 cps, with responses in the presence of the S(D) continuing to be reinforced during testing. The test yielded a gradient of response strength with rate highest in the presence of the S(D) and decreasing with increasing distance from this value. An interresponse time (IRT) analysis of responding during generalization testing revealed no systematic differences in modal IRT category or in median IRT to the different test stimuli. Mean IRT was lowest in the presence of the S(D) and increased systematically with increasing distance from this value, supporting the hypothesis that the generalization gradient of response rate is primarily the result of an increasing proportion of "long" IRT responses to stimuli increasingly distant from the S(D).     

DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF CORRECT RESPONSES TO PROBES AND PROMPTS IN PICTURE-NAME TRAINING WITH SEVERELY RETARDED CHILDREN

A systematic sequence of prompt and probe trials was used to teach picture names to three severely retarded children. On prompt trials the experimenter presented a picture and said the picture name for the child to imitate; on probe trials the experimenter did not name the picture. A procedure whereby correct responses to prompts and probes were nondifferentially reinforced was compared with procedures whereby correct responses to prompts and probes were differentially reinforced according to separate and independent schedules of primary reinforcement. In Phase 1, correct responses to prompts and probes were reinforced nondifferentially on a fixed ratio (FR) 6 or 8 schedule; in Phase 2, correct responses to prompts were reinforced on the FR schedule and correct responses to probes were reinforced on an FR schedule of the same value; in Phase 3, correct responses to prompts were reinforced on the FR schedule and correct responses to probes were reinforced on a continuous reinforcement (CRF; every correct response reinforced) schedule; in Phase 4, correct responses to prompts were reinforced on a CRF schedule and correct responses to probes were reinforced on the FR schedule; in Phase 5, a reversal to the conditions of Phase 3 was conducted. For all three children, the FR schedule for correct responses to prompts combined with the CRF schedule for correct responses to probes (Phases 3 and 5) generated the highest number of correct responses to probes, the highest accuracy (correct responses relative to correct responses plus errors) on probe trials, and the highest rate of learning to name pictures.     

Concurrent performances: stimulus-control gradients during schedules of signalled and unsignalled concurrent reinforcement

On one key, pigeons' pecks were reinforced according to a variable-interval schedule in the presence of vertical lines, and were not reinforced in the presence of oblique lines. On a second key, pecks were reinforced according to a variable-interval schedule in the presence of blue, according to a signalled variable-interval schedule in the presence of red, and were not reinforced in the presence of white. Subsequently, during extinction, stimulus-control gradients were obtained by presenting eight different line orientations on the first key concurrent with each of the three colors on the second key. On the first key, line-orientation gradients tended to be lower, narrower, and less shifted in peak or area when the second-key stimulus was blue or red, the stimuli respectively correlated with unsignalled and signalled reinforcement, than when it was white, the stimulus correlated with extinction. Thus, the effect on first-key line-orientation gradients depended on second-key stimuli correlated with concurrent reinforcement, whether or not these stimuli were also correlated with concurrent responding. As a function of first-key line orientation, an inverted gradient was obtained on the second key during blue; during both red and white, rates of pecking on the second key were near zero.     

Reinforcement rate and interresponse time differentiation

Reinforcement rate and differential reinforcement of IRTs were independently manipulated to assess their relative contribution to the control of interresponse times (IRTs). Modified percentile reinforcement schedules (Platt, 1973) allowed control of reinforcement rate while longest or shortest IRTs were selectively reinforced. In the absence of differential IRT reinforcement, mean IRT decreased with increasing reinforcement rate. Compared to this small effect of reinforcement rate, reinforcement of long IRTs produced large changes in mean IRT at constant reinforcement rates. No interaction of reinforcement rate and IRT reinforcement was detected. The demonstration of large IRT changes in the absence of reinforcement-rate changes indicates the precedence of IRT reinforcement over molar reinforcement-rate correlations in the determination of IRTs in these procedures.