Effects of diazepam on schedule-controlled and schedule-induced behavior under signaled and unsignaled shock.

Schedule-controlled lever pressing and schedule-induced licking were studied in rats under a multiple fixed-interval fixed-interval schedule of food reinforcement upon which was superimposed a multiple variable-time variable-time schedule of electric-shock delivery. Shocks were signaled in one component of the multiple schedule and unsignaled in the other. The effects of diazepam upon the suppression of behavior during the signal (conditioned suppression) and during signaled and unsignaled shock (differential suppression) were studied under several shock intensities (Experiment 1) and at increased body weight (Experiment 2). In each study, diazepam led to dose-dependent increases in the rate of pressing and licking during signaled and unsignaled shock, but had little effect on conditioned suppression. the rate-enhancing effects of diazepam depended upon the intensity of shock, nature of the response, and whether or not shocks were signaled. The data was discussed in terms of (1) implications for understanding the effects of signaled and unsignaled shock on behavior, (2) the effects of diazepam on behavior suppressed by response-independent shock, and (3) comparison between operant and schedule-induced behavior.     

Suppression of operant behavior and schedule-induced licking in rats

The first experiment studied the effects of punishment on rats' lever pressing maintained by a fixed-interval schedule of food reinforcement and on the associated schedule-induced licking. When licking was followed by shock, licking was suppressed but lever pressing was largely unaffected. When lever pressing was followed by shock, lever pressing was suppressed but licking was unaffected. In both cases, the punished behavior recovered its previous unpunished level when the shocks were discontinued. In a second experiment, the rats' lever pressing was maintained by a variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement under which polydipsic licking also developed. Both lever pressing and licking were partially suppressed during a stimulus correlated with occasional unavoidable electric shocks. With a higher shock intensity, both behaviors were suppressed further. Both lever pressing and licking recovered their previous levels when shocks were discontinued. These results show that schedule-induced licking, which has been described as adjunctive behavior, can be suppressed by procedures that suppress reinforced lever pressing, an operant behavior.     

Effects of response-dependent and independent electric shock on schedule-induced polydipsia

In Experiment I, lever pressing by rats was maintained by the delivery of food pellets under a 45-sec fixed-interval schedule. Fixed-time 180-sec and fixed-interval 180-sec schedules of shock delivery were systematically superimposed on the baseline food schedule to study effects on schedule-induced water intake. Response-dependent shock had little, if any, effect on water intake, whereas shocks independent of lever pressing attenuated fluid intake. In Experiment 2, rats received food pellets under a fixed-time 60-sec schedule. Electric shock delivered concurrently under a variable-time 180-sec schedule, but never while the animal was licking or within 5 sec after licking terminated, led to similar attenuation of water intake. These findings suggest that schedule-induced polydipsia is sensitive to differences in the functional properties of response-independent and dependent electric shock.     

Preference for signaled over unsignaled shock schedules: Ruling out asymmetry and response fixation as factors

Experiment 1 tested whether a “symmetrical” choice procedure yields results different from those previously reported using the “unidirectional” standard changeover procedure (e.g., Badia & Culbertson, 1972). Subjects could change at any time from unsignaled to signaled shock by pressing a lever and from signaled to unsignaled shock by pressing a second lever. Results were identical to those of the standard procedure and showed that the standard procedure is fully adequate. Experiment 2 tested whether choice of high density signaled shock over low-density unsignaled shock (Badia, Coker, & Harsh, 1973) resulted from initial training with equal-density schedules. Subjects were trained and tested with signaled shock twice as dense as unsignaled shock. Three of four subjects strongly preferred the signaled condition, thus ruling out carry-over and “response fixation” as alternative explanations.     

RESPONDING MAINTAINED UNDER INTERMITTENT SCHEDULES OF ELECTRIC-SHOCK PRESENTATION: “SAFETY” OR SCHEDULE EFFCTS?

Four experiments were conducted in which lever pressing by squirrel monkeys was maintained under multiple, mixed, or chained schedules of electric-shock presentation. In the first two experiments, a multiple schedule was employed in which a fixed-interval schedule of shock presentation alternated with a signaled two-minute component. Initially, no events were scheduled during the two-minute component (a safety period). In the first experiment, the safety period was “degraded” by introducing and systematically increasing the frequency of periodic shocks presented during that component. In the second experiment, the proportion of overall safe time to unsafe time was decreased by decreasing the value of the fixed-interval schedule while holding constant shock frequency during the two-minute component. In the third experiment, the overall arrangement was changed from a multiple to a mixed schedule in an attempt to determine whether fixed-interval responding would be maintained when a single exteroceptive stimulus was associated with both components. In the fourth experiment, the overall arrangement was changed from a multiple to a chained schedule in an effort to determine whether fixed-interval responding would be maintained when its consequence was presentation of a signaled “unsafe” period. Fixed-interval responding was well maintained under all experimental conditions; the varied relationships obtained lend more support to conceptualizations of shock-maintained behavior as exemplifying schedule-controlled behavior than to suggestions that such behavior may be readily accounted for by “safety theory.”     

Differential reinstatement predicted by preextinction response rate

Reinstatement refers to the recovery of previously extinguished responding by the responseindependent delivery of a stimulus that was a reinforcer in training. Two experiments were conducted to examine relative reinstatement following the training of differential preextinction response rates, either with equal (Experiment 1) or unequal (Experiment 2) preextinction reinforcement rates. In Experiment 1, each of 3 pigeons first pecked at relatively high rates in the tandem variable-time 117-sec fixed-interval 3-sec component of a multiple schedule and at lower rates in a separate tandem variableinterval 117-sec fixed-time 3-sec component. Reinforcement rates were equal between components. Pecking then was extinguished in each component, before being reinstated under a multiple variabletime 120-sec variable-time 120-sec schedule. Greater reinstatement occurred in the component previously correlated with higher rates of pecking. In Experiment 2, in an initial condition, the mean rate of lever pressing for one group of 8 rats was significantly higher under a fixed-ratio 3 schedule than for another group of 8 rats under a fixed-ratio 1 schedule. Mean reinforcement rate was significantly higher for the group exposed to the fixed-ratio 1 schedule. For each group, lever pressing then was extinguished, before being reinstated under a variable-time 30-sec schedule. Significantly greater mean reinstatement occurred for the group previously exposed to the fixed-ratio 3 schedule. These results suggest that differential reinstatement may be predicted by preextinction response rate, perhaps independently of preextinction reinforcement rate.     

Conditioned suppression of drl responding: Effect of ucs intensity, schedule parameter, and schedule context

In Experiment I, groups of rats were trained to press a lever for food reinforcement on differential reinforcement of low rate (DRL) schedules which differed in parameter value. A stimulus which terminated with either a 0.5-mA or 2.0-mA electric shock was then superimposed upon each DRL baseline. In general, the magnitude of conditioned suppression was an inverse function of DRL schedule parameter and a direct function of shock intensity. Experiment II demonstrated that the rate of responding maintained by the DRL component of a multiple DRL-extinction schedule decreased during a stimulus preceding a 0.5-mA shock, whereas the rate of responding maintained by the DRL component of a multiple DRL-variable interval schedule showed little change or increased slightly during a stimulus preceding a 0.5-mA shock.     

Effects of d-amphetamine and caffeine on schedule-controlled and schedule-induced responding.

The effects of d-amphetamine and caffeine were studied on rates and patterns of lever pressing and schedule-induced licking under fixed-interval schedules of food pellet presentation. In addition, the effects of caffeine were studied on lever pressing and licking under a multiple fixed-ratio fixed-interval schedule. Caffeine reduced mean overall rates of licking at lower doses than it reduced mean overall rates of pressing under the fixed-interval schedules, but the effects of caffeine on both licking and lever pressing depended largely on the control rate of responding. d-Amphetamine reduced mean overall rates of lever pressing and licking at about the same dose, but the effects of d-amphetamine also were a function of the control rate of responding.     

Pavlovian contingencies and resistance to change in a multiple schedule

According to theoretical accounts of behavioral momentum, the Pavlovian stimulus—reinforcer contingency determines resistance to change. To assess this prediction, 8 pigeons were exposed to an unsignaled delay-of-reinforcement schedule (a tandem variable-interval fixed-time schedule), a signaled delay-of-reinforcement schedule (a chain variable-interval fixed-time schedule), and an immediate, zero-delay schedule of reinforcement in a three-component multiple schedule. The unsignaled delay and signaled delay schedules employed equal fixed-time delays, with the only difference being a stimulus change in the signaled delay schedule. Overall rates of reinforcement were equated for the three schedules. The Pavlovian contingency was identical for the unsignaled and immediate schedules, and response—reinforcer contiguity was degraded for the unsignaled schedule. Results from two disruption procedures (prefeeding subjects prior to experimental sessions and adding a variable-time schedule to timeout periods separating baseline components) demonstrated that response—reinforcer contiguity does play a role in determining resistance to change. The results from the extinction manipulation were not as clear. Responding in the unsignaled delay component was consistently less resistant to change than was responding in both the immediate and presignaled segments of the signaled delay components, contrary to the view that Pavlovian contingencies determine resistance to change. Probe tests further supported the resistance-to-change results, indicating consistency between resistance to change and preference, both of which are putative measures of response strength.     

Relative durations of conditioned stimulus and intertrial interval in conditioned suppression.

The effects of the relative durations of the conditional stimulus and the intertrial interval on bar pressing during a conditioned-suppression procedure were examined as a function of two additional variables--type of operant baseline schedule and rate of shock presentation. In Experiment 1, response suppression was compared across components of a multiple fixed-ratio, random-ratio, fixed-interval, random-interval schedule, at relative conditioned-stimulus/intertrial-interval durations of 1/1, 1/4, and 1/9. In Experiment 2, relative conditioned-stimulus/intertrial-interval duration (1/5, 3/3, or 5/1) was manipulated across groups, while shock frequency (2, 6, or 10 shocks/hr) was manipulated within groups. In both experiments, suppression during the signal was virtually complete at all relative durations. Responding was also suppressed during the intertrial interval, but that suppression varied as a function of experimental manipulations. In Experiment 1, intertrial-interval response rates were higher when relative signal duration was 1/9 than when it was 1/1, although both relative signal duration and shock frequency, which covaried, could have contributed to the difference. In Experiment 2, the patterning of response rates between successive shocks was affected by relative duration, absolute rates during the intertrial interval varied as a function of shock frequency, and differences between suppression during the signal and suppression during the intertrial interval were affected by both relative duration and shock frequency. The data support an analysis based upon relationships between shock-correlated and intertrial-interval stimuli and, as assessed by the relative-delay-to-reinforcement metric, are comparable to results that have been reported from experiments using similar manipulations under the autoshaping paradigm.     

Intercurrent and reinforced behavior under multiple spaced-responding schedules

Lever pressing in rats was reinforced with food under a multiple spaced-responding schedule. A lever, food cup, and drinking tube were mounted in a running wheel so that lever pressing, running, and licking could be recorded. Running and licking had no scheduled consequences. Lever pressing was reinforced under a multiple schedule with three spaced-responding components and an extinction component. Each component was associated with a different auditory stimulus. Spaced-responding components reinforced only lever presses terminating interresponse times equal to or greater than 10, 20, or 60 sec, respectively. Rates of lever pressing, reinforcement, and licking all decreased as schedule parameter increased. Efficiency of spaced responding, as measured by reinforcements per response, also decreased. Rate of wheel running either increased or increased and then decreased with increasing schedule parameter. Individual running rates differed substantially. Neither licking nor running rate correlated with individual differences in efficiency. Analysis of conditional probabilities among the several response classes showed that, as the schedule requirement increased, the probability of running after a lever press increased and the probability of licking after a lever press decreased. After reinforcement, one subject always pressed the lever next. In the other subjects, the conditional probability of lever pressing, given reinforcement, increased while the probability of licking, given reinforcement, decreased with increasing schedule requirement. Results are discussed in relation to the concepts of schedule-induced and mediating behavior.     

Disruption of responding maintained by conditioned reinforcement: alterations in response-conditioned-reinforcer relations

An observing procedure was used to investigate the effects of alterations in response-conditioned-reinforcer relations on observing. Pigeons responded to produce schedule-correlated stimuli paired with the availability of food or extinction. The contingency between observing responses and conditioned reinforcement was altered in three experiments. In Experiment 1, after a contingency was established in baseline between the observing response and conditioned reinforcement, it was removed and the schedule-correlated stimuli were presented independently of responding according to a variable-time schedule. The variable-time schedule was constructed such that the rate of stimulus presentations was yoked from baseline. The removal of the observing contingency reliably reduced rates of observing. In Experiment 2, resetting delays to conditioned reinforcement were imposed between observing responses and the schedule-correlated stimuli they produced. Delay values of 0, 0.5, 1, 5, and 10 s were examined. Rates of observing varied inversely as a function of delay value. In Experiment 3, signaled and unsignaled resetting delays between observing responses and schedule-correlated stimuli were compared. Baseline rates of observing were decreased less by signaled delays than by unsignaled delays. Disruptions in response-conditioned-reinforcer relations produce similar behavioral effects to those found with primary reinforcement.     

Signal modality and choice between signaled and unsignaled food

Choice between signaled and unsignaled response-independent food schedules was assessed in three experiments using a commitment procedure. In Experiment 1, subjects tested with a 5-s visual signal consistently changed from the signaled to the unsignaled schedule. Changing from the unsignaled to the signaled schedule was observed only occasionally and only at low levels. The same outcome was observed in Experiment 2 with different types of visual signals and with different stimulus combinations identifying the signal period, the signal-absent period, and the unsignaled schedule. In Experiment 3 the visual signal was replaced with an auditory signal for four of the subjects tested in Experiment 2. The subjects then changed from the unsignaled to the signaled schedule or showed a substantial reduction in choice for the unsignaled schedule. The data were assessed using a conditioned-reinforcement interpretation of choice.     

Drugs and punished responding II: d-amphetamine-induced increases in punished responding

The effects of d-amphetamine on punished responding were studied in two experiments. In Experiment I, pigeons responded under a multiple fixed-ratio 30 response fixed-interval 5-min schedule of food presentation with 60-sec limited holds in both components. Each response was punished with electric shock, the intensity of which was varied systematically. In Experiment II, another group of pigeons responded under a multiple fixed-interval 5-min fixed-interval 5-min schedule of food presentation with 40-sec limited holds. Each response was punished with shock during one component, and every thirtieth response was punished in the other component. d-Amphetamine increased overall rates of punished responding only rarely under any of the punishment conditions; however, response rates within the fixed-interval when rates were low were increased by d-amphetamine when the shock intensity was low (Experiment I), or when responses produced shock intermittently (Experiment II). The data suggest that the effects of d-amphetamine on punished responding depend on the control rate of responding, the punishment intensity, the punishment frequency, and the schedule of food presentation.     

Effects of electric-shock delivery on schedule-induced water intake: delay of shock, shock intensity, and body-weight loss.

In each of four experiments, schedule-induced water intake in the rat was studied under fixed-time 40-sec food delivery. Experiments I and II studied the temporal relationship between response-independent electric-shock delivery and licking. Shock was delivered under a variable-time 60-sec schedule. A lick-dependent delay was imposed so that licking and shock delivery were systematically separated in time by a minimum of 1 to 15 sec. Over a wide range of shock intensities the data failed to reveal a consistent delay-of-shock effect. Similar shock intensities led to similar reduction of water intake at each delay of shock interval. Experiments III and IV studied the effects of body-weight loss on water intake during independent shock delivery. In Experiment III, shock was delivered under variable-time 60-sec with a minimum separation between shock and licking of 5 sec. In Experiment IV, shock was delivered under variable-time 180-sec. The minimum separation between shock and licking was 10 sec. In each study, the resistance of water intake to suppression by shock delivery increased as the degree of body-weight loss increased. Schedule-induced water intake was affected more by shock when the animal was maintained at 90% of free-feeding weight than at 70%.     

Signaled alternative reinforcement and the persistence of operant behavior

Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) is a treatment designed to eliminate problem behavior by reinforcing an alternative behavior at a higher rate. Availability of alternative reinforcement may be signaled, as with Functional Communication Training, or unsignaled. Whether or not alternative reinforcement is signaled could influence both the rate and persistence of problem behavior. The present study investigated whether signaling the availability of alternative reinforcement affects the rate and persistence of a concurrently available target response with pigeons. Three components of a multiple concurrent schedule arranged equal reinforcement rates for target responding. Two of the components also arranged equal reinforcement rates for an alternative response. In one DRA component, a discrete stimulus signaled the availability of response‐contingent alternative reinforcement by changing the keylight color upon reinforcement availability. In the other DRA component, availability of alternative reinforcement was not signaled. Target responding was most persistent in the unsignaled DRA component when disrupted by satiation, free food presented between components, and extinction, relative to the signaled DRA and control components. These findings suggest the discrete stimulus functionally separated the availability of alternative reinforcement from the discriminative stimuli governing target responding. These findings provide a novel avenue to explore in translational research assessing whether signaling the availability of alternative reinforcement with DRA treatments reduces the persistence of problem behavior.     

Suppression of ethanol-reinforced lever pressing by delaying food availability.

When food was initially available to rats under a fixed-interval 26-second schedule and each liquid-reinforced lever press delayed food availability 8 seconds, suppression of liquid-reinforced lever pressing and liquid consumption occurred when the liquid presented was 4, 8, 16, 32, and 0% ethanol. Suppression did not occur in yoked-control animals, which received food coincidentally with experimental animals but were not directly exposed to the delay dependency. After exposure to the food schedule, each ethanol solution served as a reinforcer in the absence of food presentation. Delaying food availability for increasingly long periods (8 to 2048 seconds) suppressed ethanol-reinforced lever pressing and consumption relative to baseline levels, with the maximum decrease being below the level maintained in the absence of food. However, degree of suppression did not increase monotonically with delay length. Liquid-reinforced performance of yoked-control animals indicated that suppression did not result from changes in the sequencing of food presentation alone.     

Conditional acceleration and external disinhibition of operant lever pressing by prereward, neutral, and reinforcing stimuli

Rats responding under a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule increased their rates of lever pressing during a 20-second click/flash stimulus that preceded the delivery of a response-independent food pellet. The increase could not be attributed to suppression of collateral behavior that has been said to mediate temporally-spaced responding. We propose that the prereward stimulus functioned as an external disinhibitor of lever pressing that had been inhibited by the constraints of the operant schedule. Support is derived from the observed disinhibitory effects of a 10-second unpaired click/flash stimulus and of unsignaled, response-independent pellets that were presented while the animals were responding under the same schedule.     

Responding of pigeons under variable-interval schedules of unsignaled, briefly signaled, and completely signaled delays to reinforcement

In Experiment 1, three pigeons' key pecking was maintained under a variable-interval 60-s schedule of food reinforcement. A 1-s unsignaled nonresetting delay to reinforcement was then added. Rates decreased and stabilized at values below those observed under immediate-reinforcement conditions. A brief stimulus change (key lit red for 0.5 s) was then arranged to follow immediately the peck that began the delay. Response rates quickly returned to baseline levels. Subsequently, rates near baseline levels were maintained with briefly signaled delays of 3 and 9 s. When a 27-s briefly signaled delay was instituted, response rates decreased to low levels. In Experiment 2, four pigeons' responding was first maintained under a multiple variable-interval 60-s (green key) variable-interval 60-s (red key) schedule. Response rates in both components fell to low levels when a 3-s unsignaled delay was added. In the first component delays were then briefly signaled in the same manner as Experiment 1, and in the second component they were signaled with a change in key color that remained until food was delivered. Response rates increased to near baseline levels in both components, and remained near baseline when the delays in both components were lengthened to 9 s. When delays were lengthened to 27 s, response rates fell to low levels in the briefly signaled delay component for three of four pigeons while remaining at or near baseline in the completely signaled delay component. In Experiment 3, low response rates under a 9-s unsignaled delay to reinforcement (tandem variable-interval 60 s fixed-time 9 s) increased when the delay was briefly signaled. The role of the brief stimulus as conditioned reinforcement may be a function of its temporal relation to food, and thus may be related to the eliciting function of the stimulus.     

Conditioned suppression of behavior maintained by intracranial stimulation as a function of stimulation intensity.

Conditioned suppression was demonstrated in two experiments with rats lever pressing on a fixed-ration 1 schedule for lateral hypothalamic intracranaial stimulation (ICS)'n Experiment I, conditioned suppression of responding for low-intensity ICS was obtained with a moderate intensity of foot shock, In Experiment II, low and high intensities of ICS were alternated within the same session and the same animal The suppression that was exhibited with low intensity ICS was minimal or absent with high-intensity stimulation, despite the pairing of foot shock with each warning stimulus. Conditioned suppression was a function of ICS intensity, and was independent of response rates. The inverse relationship between ICS intensity and degree os suppression is consistent with a motivational analysis of conditioned suppression. Previous reports of resistance to suppression of behaviors maintained by ICS may now be attributed to the use of high-intensity stimulation.