Increased reinforcement when timeout from avoidance includes access to a safe place

Three experiments investigated the reinforcing value of access to a safe place during timeout from an avoidance schedule. Rats were trained on conjoint schedules in which responding both postponed shock on a free-operant avoidance schedule and produced periods of timeout on fixed-ratio schedules. In some conditions, a shelf was inserted into the operant chamber during timeout, enabling subjects to get off the grid floor. The combination of timeout and shelf maintained substantially higher response rates than the baseline avoidance schedule with ratio requirements as high as 90 (Experiment I). Adding the shelf to timeouts in one component of multiple fixed-ratio schedules of timeout resulted in higher response rates in the component where the shelf was included (Experiment II). When timeouts with and without the shelf were arranged on concurrent schedules, the shelf-timeout combination was preferred, even when of shorter duration than timeout alone (Experiment III). In all three experiments, subjects climbed on the shelf, although all shocks were cancelled during timeout periods. The results could not be accounted for solely in terms of the reinforcing properties of changes in shock rates, but required an interpretation that ascribed conditioned reinforcing value to stimuli associated with such changes.     

Stimulus-food relations and free-operant postponement of timeout from response-independent food presentation

Grain was briefly presented to food-deprived pigeons intermittently and response-independently except during signaled timeouts. During Experiment 1, key pecks postponed the next timeout for a specified interval. Rates of pecking during time in were inversely related to the length of time pecking postponed the next timeout. Response-independent presentation of temporal distributions of timeouts exactly matched to a preceding postponement condition decreased pecking rates during Experiment 2. These results indicate that key pecking of pigeons can be controlled by response-dependent postponement of timeout, but that responses elicited by stimulus-reinforcer relations inherent in timeout-postponement procedures may substantially modify rates and patterns of pecking.     

Choosing schedules of signaled appetitive events over schedules of unsignaled ones

Two experiments were completed allowing albino rats to choose between signaled and unsignaled reward conditions. These experiments examined the effects on preference of (1) response dependent versus response-independent reward and, (2) food pellets versus chocolate milk as the reward. All subjects preferred the signaled condition over the unsignaled condition, whether exposed to response-dependent, or to response-independent delivery of rewards. Preference was controlled most effectively by presenting both the signal itself and the correlated stimulus identifying the signaled condition. The signal presented alone (Extinction 3) controlled preference more effectively than did the stimulus correlated with the signaled condition (Extinction 2). The second experiment showed that the quality of the reinforcer (pellets and chocolate milk) did not affect preference for signaled reward since all subjects preferred the signaled condition at levels comparable to those observed in Experiment 1, with food pellets. These results, along with others, argue against species differences, response-dependency, and reinforcer quality as variables affecting the direction of preference.     

Timeout from concurrent schedules.

Response-contingent timeouts of equal duration and frequency were added to both alternatives of unequal concurrent schedules of reinforcement. For each of 4 pigeons in Experiment 1, relative response rates generally became less extreme as the frequency of timeout increased. In Experiment 2, relative response rates consistently approached indifference as the duration of timeout was increased. Variation in time allocation was less consistent in both experiments. Absolute response rates did not vary with the timeout contingency in either experiment. In a third experiment, neither measure of choice varied systematically when the duration of a postreinforcement blackout was varied. In contrast to the present results, preference has been shown to vary directly with the parameters of shock delivery in related procedures. The pattern of results in the first two experiments follows that obtained with other manipulations of the overall rate of reinforcement in concurrent schedules. The results of the third experiment suggest that an intertrial interval following reinforcement is not a critical feature of the overall rate of reinforcement.     

Schedules of food postponement: II. Maintenance of behavior by food postponement and effects of the schedule parameter

In Experiment I, food-deprived, feeder-trained squirrel monkeys pressed a lever to postpone brief electric shocks (Response-Shock=Shock-Shock interval=30 seconds). Forty-one three-hour sessions of shock postponement were followed by 120 sessions of concurrent shock and food postponement. The shock schedule was unchanged and the food schedule was Response-food interval–20 seconds, Food-food interval 10 seconds. After concurrent shock and food postponement, the shock schedule was discontinued and 40 sessions of food postponement ensued, followed by 53 sessions of extinction. After extinction, food postponement was resumed for 11 sessions. Stable responding with low food rates was maintained under food-postponement after the concurrent schedule. Responding decreased to low levels under extinction and recovered immediately to previous levels when the food-postponement schedule was re-instated. In Experiment II, a parameter of the food-postponement schedule was studied sequentially. Using the same subjects, the Response-food–Food-food interval was manipulated from four seconds to 80 seconds with several orders of presentation. Relations of response rates and food rates to the parameter were similar to those seen under shock postponement. Exposure to very short postponement times (four seconds), resulting in very high food rates, decreased but did not abolish subsequent responding at longer postponement times. Results are discussed from the point of view that reinforcing functions of stimuli consequent on responding depend on a prior history of scheduled contact with those stimuli.     

Timeout postponement without increased reinforcement frequency

Three experiments were conducted to examine pigeons' postponement of signaled extinction periods (timeouts) from a schedule of food reinforcement when such responding neither decreased overall timeout frequency nor increased the overall frequency of food reinforcement. A discrete-trial procedure was used in which a response during the first 5 s of a trial postponed an otherwise immediate 60-s timeout to a later part of that same trial but had no effect on whether the timeout occurred. During time-in periods, responses on a second key produced food according to a random-interval 20-s schedule. In Experiment 1, the response-timeout interval was 45 s under postponement conditions and 0 s under extinction conditions (responses were ineffective in postponing timeouts). The percentage of trials with a response was consistently high when the timeout-postponement contingency was in effect and decreased to low levels when it was discontinued under extinction conditions. In Experiment 2, the response-timeout interval was also 45 s but postponement responses increased the duration of the timeout, which varied from 60 s to 105 s across conditions. Postponement responding was maintained, generally at high levels, at all timeout durations, despite sometimes large decreases in the overall frequency of food reinforcement. In Experiment 3, timeout duration was held constant at 60 s while the response-timeout interval was varied systematically across conditions from 0 s to 45 s. Postponement responding was maintained under all conditions in which the response-timeout interval exceeded 0 s (the timeout interval in the absence of a response). In some conditions of Experiment 3, which were designed to control for the immediacy of food reinforcement and food-correlated (time-in) stimuli, responding postponed timeout but the timeout was delayed whether a response occurred or not. Responding was maintained for 2 of 3 subjects, suggesting that behavior was negatively reinforced by timeout postponement rather than positively reinforced by the more immediate presentation of food or food-correlated (time-in) stimuli.     

Food and cocaine self-administration by baboons: effects of alternatives.

The effects of the availability of an alternative reinforcer on responding maintained by food pellets or drug solutions were examined in 8 adult male baboons (Papio hamadrayas anubis). During daily 23-hr experimental sessions, baboons had access to both food pellets and fluid under a two-choice procedure, in which the response requirement, under a fixed-ratio schedule, differed for the two commodities. There were no restrictions on access to water, which was continuously available from a spout at the rear of each cage. In Experiment 1, the fixed-ratio requirement, or cost, for fluid delivery remained constant while the fixed-ratio requirement for pellets was changed every 2 or 3 days when (a) no fluid, (b) a dilute dextrose vehicle, (c) 0.008 mg/kg per delivery cocaine, (d) 0.016 mg/kg per delivery cocaine, or (e) 0.032 mg/kg per delivery cocaine was available concurrently. In Experiment 1, progressively increasing the response requirement for pellets decreased pellet intake, but for 4 baboons pellet intake at maximum pellet cost was lower when cocaine, compared to the vehicle, was available. Increasing the response requirement for pellets had variable effects on vehicle intake. However, increasing the response requirement for pellets increased intake of at least one dose of cocaine to a greater extent than vehicle in all 8 baboons. Thus, cocaine could be considered a more effective economic substitute than vehicle for pellets. Experiment 2 systematically varied the order in which the response requirements for a pellet delivery were presented and added a control condition in which cocaine doses, yoked to the amount self-administered, were given three times during the session by the experimenter. Again, pellet intake at maximal pellet cost was lower when cocaine, compared to the vehicle, was available. In contrast, experimenter-given cocaine doses did not alter responding maintained by pellets. Thus, the effects of self-administered cocaine on responding maintained by food pellets differed from the effects of experimenter-given cocaine on responding maintained by food pellets.     

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.     

Mechanisms of resurgence II: Response-contingent reinforcers can reinstate a second extinguished behavior

Three experiments with rat subjects examined resurgence of an extinguished instrumental response using the procedure introduced by Epstein (1983) with pigeons. There were three phases: (1) initial acquisition of pressing on a lever (L1) for pellet reward, (2) extinction of L1, and (3) a test session in which a second lever (L2) was inserted, briefly reinforced, and then extinguished. Experiment 1 confirmed that if pressing L2 delivered 20 pellets followed by extinction, rats would resume L1 responding in the final test. Experiment 2 compared the effects of response-contingent and non-contingent rewards delivered upon insertion of L2. Although insertion of L2 alone did not increase L1 responding, response-contingent and non-contingent rewards led to comparable increases in L1 responding. Experiment 3 found that the delivery of non-contingent pellets during extinction of L1, which would be expected to reduce the ability of pellets to set the occasion for the L1 response, also reduced the effects of both response-contingent and non-contingent rewards during the final test. The results indicate that in this method, the resurgence treatment leads to an increase in L1 pressing due to simple presentation of the pellet; delivering the reinforcer after extinction of L1 reinstates L1 responding by setting the occasion for the L1 response.     

Effects of anorectic drugs on food intake under progressive-ratio and free-access conditions in rats

The effects of two anorectic drugs, dexfenfluramine and phentermine, on food intake under different food-access conditions were examined. Experiment 1 compared the effects of these drugs on food intake under a progressive-ratio (PR) schedule and free-access conditions. Dexfenfluramine decreased food intake under both conditions, but the doses required to decrease intake under free-access conditions were higher than those required to reduce intake under the PR condition. Intermediate doses of phentermine sometimes increased breaking points, and higher doses decreased them. Phentermine decreased food intake at the same doses under both access conditions. Thus the potency of dexfenfluramine, but not phentermine, to decrease food-maintained behavior depended upon the food-access condition. Experiment 2 used a novel mixed progressive-ratio schedule of food delivery to study the duration of drug effects. Sessions consisted of five components separated by 3-hr timeouts. The ratio requirement reset at the beginning of each component and a new breaking point was obtained. Both dexfenfluramine and phentermine dose-dependently decreased breaking points early in the session. In some rats, compensatory increases in breaking point were observed. That is, breaking points later in the session increased over control levels, resulting in no change in the total number of food pellets earned for the session compared to control. The present findings suggest that the effects of some anorectic drugs depend upon the access conditions for food; increasing the effort to obtain food may enhance their ability to decrease food-maintained behavior.     

Risky choice as a function of amount and variance in food supply.

In Experiment 1, 4 rats earned their daily food ration by choosing on a trials basis between a "risky" and a "riskless" lever. The risky lever produced either 15 45-mg food pellets or no pellets, and on average provided five pellets per choice. The riskless lever always produced three pellets. Across conditions, the number of trials per session was varied. Body weight and choice of the risky lever decreased as the number of trials per session decreased, even though body weight could only be defended by increased choice of the risky lever. In Experiment 2, trials per session were fixed, but the number of pellets delivered by the risky and riskless levers was either at the same level as in Experiment 1 or tripled from those levels. Now choice of the risky lever was inversely related to the size of reinforcement and to body weight. The results of these experiments show that risk aversion covaries with the amount of food available in a session and the daily variance in the amount of food earned.     

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

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

The repetition effect in judgments of temporal duration across minutes, days, and months.

Three experiments assessed the stability of the repetition effect in time judgment. In Experiment 1, subjects (N = 18) produced intervals ranging from 8 to 31 sec in a two-phase procedure with a five min rest between phases. In Experiment 2, subjects (N = 20) made verbal estimates of intervals ranging from 8 to 20 sec with a 48-hour delay between phases. Experiment 3 involved daily productions by three subjects of intervals ranging from 8 to 54 sec over several months. The slope of the psychophysical function increased across phases in Experimental 1, declined (as expected for estimation) across days in Experiment 2, and increased across months in Experiment 3. It was concluded that the repetition effect is relatively permanent and thus more similar to habituation than to sensory adaptation.     

Visual Reinforcement Signals Interfere with the Effects of Reinforcer Magnitude Manipulations

Three experiments examined the effect of reinforcement magnitude on free-operant response rates. In Experiment 1, rats that received four food pellets responded faster than rats that received one pellet on a variable ratio 30 schedule. However, when the food hopper was illuminated during reinforcer delivery, there was no difference between the rates of response produced by the two magnitudes of reward. In Experiment 2, there was no difference in response rates emitted by rats receiving either one or four pellets of food as reward on a random interval (RI) 60-s schedule. In Experiment 3, rats responding on an RI 30-s schedule did so at a lower rate with four pellets as reinforcement than with one pellet. This effect was abolished by the illumination of the food hopper during reinforcement delivery. These results indicate that the influence of magnitude is obscured by manipulations which signal the delivery of reinforcement.     

Determinants of reinforcer accumulation during an operant task.

Responses by rats on an earn lever made available food pellets that were delivered to a food cup by responses on a second, collect, lever. The rats could either collect and immediately consume or accumulate (defined as the percentage of multiple earn responses and as the number of pellets earned before a collect response) earned pellets. In Experiment 1, accumulation varied as a function of variations in the earn or collect response requirements and whether the earn and collect levers were proximal (31 cm) or distal (248 cm) to one another. Some accumulation occurred under all but one of the conditions, but generally was higher when the earn and collect levers were distal to one another, particularly when the earn response requirement was fixed-ratio (FR) 1. In Experiment 2, the contributions of responses and time to accumulation were assessed by comparing an FR 20 earn response requirement to a condition in which only a single earn response was required at the end of a time interval nominally yoked to the FR interval. When 248 cm separated the earn and collect levers, accumulation was always greater in the FR condition, and it was not systematically related to reinforcement rate. In Experiment 3, increasing the earn response requirement with a progressive-ratio schedule that reset only with a collect response increased the likelihood of accumulation when the collect and earn levers were 248 cm apart, even though such accumulation increased the next earn response requirement. Reinforcer accumulation is an understudied dimension of operant behavior that relates to the analysis of such phenomena as hoarding and self-control, in that they too involve accumulating versus immediately collecting or consuming reinforcers.     

RESISTANCE TO CHANGE AND FREQUENCY OF RESPONSE‐DEPENDENT STIMULI UNCORRELATED WITH REINFORCEMENT

Stimuli uncorrelated with reinforcement have been shown to enhance response rates and resistance to disruption; however, the effects of different rates of stimulus presentations have not been assessed. In two experiments, we assessed the effects of adding different rates of response‐dependent brief stimuli uncorrelated with primary reinforcement on relative response rates and resistance to change. In both experiments, pigeons responded on variable‐interval 60‐s schedules of food reinforcement in two components of a multiple schedule, and brief response‐dependent keylight‐color changes were added to one or both components. Although relative response rates were not systematically affected in either experiment, relative resistance to presession feeding and extinction were. In Experiment 1, adding stimuli on a variable‐interval schedule to one component of a multiple schedule either at a low rate (1 per min) for one group or at a high rate (4 per min) for another group similarly increased resistance to disruption in the components with added stimuli. When high and low rates of stimuli were presented across components (i.e., within subjects) in Experiment 2, however, relative resistance to disruption was greater in the component presenting stimuli at a lower rate. These results suggest that stimuli uncorrelated with food reinforcement do not strengthen responding in the same way as primary reinforcers.     

The role of response-contingent incentives in lithium chloride-mediated suppression of an operant response

Three experiments investigated what role a novel incentive plays in the development of operant response suppression mediated by lithium chloride. In all experiments animals were trained to press two levers under concurrent schedules of reinforcement. In Experiment 1 responding on one lever delivered a familiar incentive (food pellets), whereas responding on an alternative lever delivered a novel incentive (sucrose solution) prior to lithium chloride injections. If lithium was administered immediately after the instrumental session, the action associated with the novel, but not with the familiar, incentive was suppressed. By comparison, in a control group for which responding on both levers led to the familiar incentive, both actions were suppressed. Experiment 2 examined whether the novelty, rather than the sensory properties, of the incentive is crucial for observing performance suppression. It was found that animals familiarized with the “target” incentive were insensitive to aversion conditioning by lithium, in that there was no difference in response rates between the action that delivered the familiar incentive from that which earned the “target”. In contrast, if animals were unfamiliar with the “target” incentive at the time of aversion conditioning, they suppressed responding on the lever that was associated with the novel incentive but did not suppress responding on the lever associated with the familiar incentive. Experiment 3 investigated the mechanism underlying instrumental performance suppression. After the completion of concurrent lever press training, novel sucrose was introduced in conjunction with the pellets for responding on one lever; responding on the other lever continued to deliver only familiar pellets. Lithium injections were then administered either immediately following the sessions or several hours after the sessions. It was found that the rate of responding on the lever associated with the contingent delivery of sucrose was suppressed below that of the pellet-alone action. By comparison, if lithium injections were administered several hours following the session, an elevation in responding on the sucrose-plus-pellet lever was observed. The outcomes of all three experiments demonstrate not only that the novelty of an incentive is important in obtaining performance suppression, but also that a novel incentive can punish instrumental responding if it has been associated with toxicosis.     

Within-session rates of responding when reinforcer magnitude is changed within the session

In the present experiment, the authors investigated the idea that within-session changes in operant response rates occur because subjects sensitize and then habituate to the reinforcer. If that is true, then altering an aspect of the reinforcer within the session should alter the observed within-session responding. The authors tested that idea by having rats press a lever for 2 food-pellet reinforcers delivered by a variable-interval 120-s schedule during 60-min baseline sessions. In treatment conditions, the magnitude of the reinforcer was halved (1 pellet) or doubled (4 pellets) 10, 20, 30, 40, or 50 min into the session. That magnitude of reinforcement then remained in effect for the rest of the session. Altering reinforcer magnitude altered the rates of responding within the session in a fashion consistent with the habituation explanation, that is, response rates increased, relative to baseline, when the magnitude of reinforcement was increased. They decreased when the magnitude was decreased. Those results were seemingly inconsistent with the competing idea that within-session decreases in responding rates are produced by satiation.     

An analysis of coordinated responding of pigeons

Experimental analyses of coordinated responding (i.e., cooperation) have been derived from a procedure described by Skinner (1962) in which reinforcers were delivered to a pair of subjects (a dyad) if both responded within a short interval, thus satisfying a coordination contingency. Although it has been suggested that this contingency enhances rates of temporally coordinated responding, limitations of past experiments have raised questions concerning this conclusion. The present experiments addressed some of these limitations by holding the schedule of reinforcement (Experiment 1: fixed ratio 1; Experiment 2; variable interval 20 s) constant across phases and between dyad members and by varying, in different conditions, the number of response keys (one to three) across which coordination could occur. Greater percentages of coordinated responding occurred under the coordinated-reinforcement phases than under independent-reinforcement phases in most conditions. The one exception during the one-key condition of Experiment 1 appeared to be a consequence of variability introduced by the independent-reinforcement phase procedure. Furthermore, coordination percentages decreased with increasing response options under both schedules. These results confirm and extend the finding that coordination contingencies control higher rates of temporally coordinated responding than independent-reinforcement contingencies do.     

Negative reinforcement with shock-frequency increase

Two avoidance-conditioning experiments in which responding delayed shocks are reported. Rats receiving an average of two shocks per minute (imposed condition) could produce, by pressing a bar, a 3-min alternate condition. Six (Experiment I) or more (Experiment II) shocks occurred in the alternate condition. All shocks in the alternate condition were delayed and delivered at 1-sec intervals. With long delays, all subjects produced the alternate condition and spent a large percentage of each session in the alternate condition. The first experiment demonstrated that the longer the delay from onset of the alternate condition to onset of the shocks, the more session time spent in the alternate condition. The second experiment indicated that despite increased shock frequency, behavior is acquired and maintained when responding leads to sufficient delay. Individual subjects produced the alternate condition by bar pressing in essentially one of two patterns. One pattern, termed postshock, involved bar pressing immediately after shock; the other, termed posttransition, involved responding immediately after the transition from the alternate to the imposed condition. These results indicate that shock-frequency reduction is not necessary for avoidance conditioning; delay to shock onset is sufficient.