Choice with delayed and probabilistic reinforcers: effects of variability, time between trials, and conditioned reinforcers.

In a discrete-trials procedure with pigeons, a response on a green key led to a 4-s delay (during which green houselights were lit) and then a reinforcer might or might not be delivered. A response on a red key led to a delay of adjustable duration (during which red houselights were lit) and then a certain reinforcer. The delay was adjusted so as to estimate an indifference point--a duration for which the two alternatives were equally preferred. Once the green key was chosen, a subject had to continue to respond on the green key until a reinforcer was delivered. Each response on the green key, plus the 4-s delay that followed every response, was called one "link" of the green-key schedule. Subjects showed much greater preference for the green key when the number of links before reinforcement was variable (averaging four) than when it was fixed (always exactly four). These findings are consistent with the view that probabilistic reinforcers are analogous to reinforcers delivered after variable delays. When successive links were separated by 4-s or 8-s "interlink intervals" with white houselights, preference for the probabilistic alternative decreased somewhat for 2 subjects but was unaffected for the other 2 subjects. When the interlink intervals had the same green houselights that were present during the 4-s delays, preference for the green key decreased substantially for all subjects. These results provided mixed support for the view that preference for a probabilistic reinforcer is inversely related to the duration of conditioned reinforcers that precede the delivery of food.     

A comparison of delays and ratio requirements in self-control choice.

In a discrete-trial procedure, pigeons could choose between 2-s and 6-s access to grain by making a single key peck. In Phase 1, the pigeons obtained both reinforcers by responding on fixed-ratio schedules. In Phase 2, they received both reinforcers after simple delays, arranged by fixed-time schedules, during which no responses were required. In Phase 3, the 2-s reinforcer was available through a fixed-time schedule and the 6-s reinforcer was available through a fixed-ratio schedule. In all conditions, the size of the delay or ratio leading to the 6-s reinforcer was systematically increased or decreased several times each session, permitting estimation of an "indifference point," the schedule size at which a subject chose each alternative equally often. By varying the size of the schedule for the 2-s reinforcer across conditions, several such indifference points were obtained from both fixed-time conditions and fixed-ratio conditions. The resulting "indifference curves" from fixed-time conditions and from fixed-ratio conditions were similar in shape, and they suggested that a hyperbolic equation describes the relation between ratio size and reinforcement value as well as the relation between reinforcer delay and its reinforcement value. The results from Phase 3 showed that subjects chose fixed-time schedules over fixed-ratio schedules that generated the same average times between a choice response and reinforcement.     

Humans' sensitivity to variation in reinforcer amount: Effects of the method of reinforcer delivery

Two experiments examined human subjects' sensitivity to variation in reinforcer amount under different methods of reinforcer delivery. Subjects chose between schedules varying in terms of amount and/or delay of reinforcement, the reinforcer being points exchangeable for money. In Experiment 1, reinforcer amount was manipulated by varying the monetary value of the points across conditions while the number of seconds of access to a consummatory response remained constant. Choice was strongly sensitive to reinforcer amount and indicative of self-control, as in previous experiments. In Experiment 2, reinforcer amount was manipulated by automatically delivering different numbers of points during the amount period, and the consummatory response was eliminated. Sensitivity to variation in reinforcer amount was significantly lower than in Experiment 1. Furthermore, the subjects in Experiment 2 exhibited significantly less self-control than did the subjects in Experiment 1. Humans' sensitivity to variation in reinforcer amount appears to be affected by factors that enhance the discrimi-nability of the consequences of responding.     

Effects of reinforcer consumption and magnitude on response rates during noncontingent reinforcement

Results of previous research on the effects of noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) have been inconsistent when magnitude of reinforcement was manipulated. We attempted to clarify the influence of NCR magnitude by including additional controls. In Study 1, we examined the effects of reinforcer consumption time by comparing the same magnitude of NCR when session time was and was not corrected to account for reinforcer consumption. Lower response rates were observed when session time was not corrected, indicating that reinforcer consumption can suppress response rates. In Study 2, we first selected varying reinforcer magnitudes (small, medium, and large) on the basis of corrected response rates observed during a contingent reinforcement condition and then compared the effects of these magnitudes during NCR. One participant exhibited lower response rates when large-magnitude reinforcers were delivered; the other ceased responding altogether even when small-magnitude reinforcers were delivered. We also compared the effects of the same NCR magnitude (medium) during 10-min and 30-min sessions. Lower response rates were observed during 30-min sessions, indicating that the number of reinforcers consumed across a session can have the same effect as the number consumed per reinforcer delivery. These findings indicate that, even when response rate is corrected to account for reinforcer consumption, larger magnitudes of NCR (defined on either a per-delivery or per-session basis) result in lower response rates than do smaller magnitudes.     

Observing behavior: effects of rate and magnitude of primary reinforcement

Four experiments examined the free-operant observing behavior of rats. In Experiment 1, observing was a bitonic function of random-ratio schedule requirements for the primary reinforcer. In Experiment 2, decreases in the magnitude of the primary reinforcer decreased observing. Experiment 3 examined observing when a random-ratio schedule or a yoked random-time schedule of primary reinforcement was in effect across conditions. Removing the response requirement for the primary reinforcer increased observing, suggesting that the effects of the random-ratio schedule in Experiment 1 likely were due to an interaction between observing and responding for the primary reinforcer. In Experiment 4, decreasing the rate of primary reinforcement by increasing the duration of a random-time schedule decreased observing monotonically. Overall, these results suggest that observing decreases with decreases in the rate or magnitude of the primary reinforcer, but that behavior related to the primary reinforcer can affect observing and potentially affect measurement of conditioned reinforcing value.     

A multicomponent approach to thinning reinforcer delivery during noncontingent reinforcement schedules

We evaluated a noncontingent reinforcement procedure that involved initially providing three subjects with signaled, continuous access to the functional reinforcer for aggression and slowly increasing the amount of time subjects were exposed to the signaled unavailability of the reinforcer. Additionally, alternative potential reinforcers were available throughout the sessions. Results showed immediate and substantial reductions in aggression for all three subjects. The clinical utility of this intervention is discussed, and future research directions are recommended.     

Stimulus Equivalence: Effects Of A Default-response Option On Emergence Of Untrained Stimulus Relations

Human subjects were exposed to a concurrent-chains schedule in which reinforcer amounts, delays, or both were varied in the terminal links, and consummatory responses were required to receive points that were later exchangeable for money. Two independent variable-interval 30-s schedules were in effect during the initial links, and delay periods were defined by fixed-time schedules. In Experiment 1, subjects were exposed to three different pairs of reinforcer amounts and delays, and sensitivity to reinforcer amount and delay was determined based on the generalized matching law. The relative responding (choice) of most subjects was more sensitive to reinforcer amount than to reinforcer delay. In Experiment 2, subjects chose between immediate smaller reinforcers and delayed larger reinforcers in five conditions with and without timeout periods that followed a shorter delay, in which reinforcer amounts and delays were combined to make different predictions based on local reinforcement density (i.e., points per delay) or overall reinforcement density (i.e., points per total time). In most conditions, subjects' choices were qualitatively in accord with the predictions from the overall reinforcement density calculated by the ratio of reinforcer amount and total time. Therefore, the overall reinforcement density appears to influence the preference of humans in the present self-control choice situation.     

Reversed PREE under multiple schedules: Exploration of a modulation hypothesis

When reinforcer rates are manipulated in within-subjects designs, persistence in subsequent extinction trials is sometimes greater to the response alternative associated with the higher reinforcer rate (“reversed” partial reinforcement extinction effect, RPREE). The RPREE is often held to be a contradiction to the conventional PREE. To explore the interaction between these effects, student subjects were exposed to a multiple high-density and low-density reinforcement schedule, then to extinction conditions. Subjects in two control conditions received the high- and low-density schedules only. For all groups, general extinction persistence was elevated, and a within-subjects RPREE occurred under the multiple schedule. The RPREE was caused by the low-density component increasing persistence to the high-density component; the high-density component did not decrease persistence to the low-density component. These results support the view that the RPREE may be a within-subjects effect of the conventional PREE.     

All Behavior is choice: Revisiting an evolutionary theory's account of behavior on single schedules

The axiomatic principle that all behavior is choice was incorporated into a revised implementation of an evolutionary theory's account of behavior on single schedules. According to this implementation, target responding occurs in the context of background responding and reinforcement. In Phase 1 of the research, the target responding of artificial organisms (AOs) animated by the revised theory was found to be well described by an exponentiated hyperbola, the parameters of which varied as a function of the background reinforcement rate. In Phase 2, the effect of reinforcer magnitude on the target behavior of the AOs was studied. As in Phase 1, the AOs' behavior was well described by an exponentiated hyperbola, the parameters of which varied with both the target reinforcer magnitude and the background reinforcement rate. Evidence from experiments with live organisms was found to be consistent with the Phase-1 predictions of the revised theory. The Phase-2 predictions have not been tested. The revised implementation of the theory can be used to study the effects of superimposing punishment on single-schedule responding, and it may lead to the discovery of a function that relates response rate to both the rate and magnitude of reinforcement on single schedules.     

The effects of unsignalled delayed reinforcement

Pigeons' pecks were reinforced according to a variable-interval schedule. A delay-of-reinforcement procedure was then added to the schedule, or a yoked-control procedure was arranged where the reinforcers occurred independently of responding according to the same variable-interval schedule. During the delay-of-reinforcement procedure, the first peck after a reinforcer was scheduled began a delay timer and the reinforcer was delivered at the end of the interval. No stimulus change signalled the delay interval and responses could occur during it, so that the obtained delays were often shorter than those scheduled. Responding under this procedure was highly variable but, in general, behavior was substantially reduced even with the shortest delay used, 3 sec. In addition, the rates maintained by delayed reinforcement were only slightly greater than those maintained by the yoked-control procedure, suggesting that adventitious pairings of response and reinforcer were responsible for some of the maintenance of behavior that did occur. The results challenge recent conceptions of reinforcement as involving response-reinforcer correlations and re-emphasize the role of temporal proximity between response and reinforcer.     

Response duration is sensitive to both immediate and delayed reinforcement

We investigated the duration of lever pressing by rats when the delivery of appetitive reinforcers was contingent upon response duration. In the first experiment, response durations increased when duration requirements were imposed, and they decreased when duration requirements were removed. This effect occurred whether reinforcers were immediate or delayed by 8 s. In order to maintain the integrity of the delay intervals, reinforcer delivery was dependent upon both lever depression and release. In a second experiment, lever depression only and a response duration of at least 4 s were required for reinforcer delivery. Compared to immediate reinforcement conditions, delayed reinforcers increased both variability and the length of the maximum response durations. In a third experiment, immediate reinforcers were delivered contingent upon lever depression and release under a variety of duration requirements. Median lever‐press durations tracked the contingencies rapidly. Across all three experiments, rats emitted numerous response durations that were too short to satisfy the reinforcer requirements, and bimodal distributions similar to those produced by differential reinforcement of low rate schedules were evident for most rats. In many aspects, response duration responds to reinforcement parameters in a fashion similar to rate of discrete responding, but an examination of this continuous dimension of behavior may provide additional information about environment–behavior relationships.     

A COMPARISON OF TWO PAIRING PROCEDURES TO ESTABLISH PRAISE AS A REINFORCER

Some individuals with intellectual disabilities do not respond to praise as a reinforcer, which may limit their ability to learn. We evaluated 2 procedures (stimulus pairing and response—stimulus pairing), both of which involved pairing previously neutral praise statements with preferred edible items, to determine their usefulness in establishing praise as a reinforcer. Results of Study 1 indicated that stimulus pairing was not effective in conditioning praise as a reinforcer for 3 of 4 subjects; results were inconclusive for the 4th subject. Results of Study 2 indicated that response—stimulus pairing was effective in conditioning praise as a reinforcer for 4 of 8 subjects. After conditioning, praise also increased the occurrence of additional target responses for these 4 subjects.     

Effects of response-independent negative reinforcers on negatively reinforced key pecking

Previous research has shown that presenting response-independent positive reinforcers reduces the response rate of an operant maintained by positive reinforcement. The present experiment investigated a similar effect using shock-free time as a negative reinforcer. Brief shocks were delivered in the presence of a distinctive stimulus, and pigeon's key pecks were reinforced by the occasional presentation of a 2-minute shock-free period. Extra 2-minute shock-free periods were added independently of behavior. For each of three pigeons, response rate during shock-on periods declined with added shock-free periods; the more frequently the extra shock-free periods occurred the greater the decline in response rate. This outcome is predicted by extending the Law of Effect to include negative reinforcement.     

An alternative method of thinning reinforcer delivery during differential reinforcement

Differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA) may result in rates of reinforcement that are impractical for caregivers to implement; therefore, recent research has examined methods for thinning reinforcer delivery during DRA. In this study, reinforcer delivery was thinned during DRA by restricting access to the participant's alternative response materials.     

THE INFLUENCE OF BEHAVIOR PRECEDING A REINFORCED RESPONSE ON BEHAVIOR CHANGE IN THE CLASSROOM1

The influence of behavior that immediately precedes a reinforced target response on the effectiveness of a reinforcement contingency was examined in two experiments with mentally retarded children in a special-education classroom. Two reinforcement schedules were examined in each experiment. For each schedule, a prespecified period of attentive behavior served as the target response. The schedules differed in whether inattentive or attentive behavior was required immediately to precede the target response. These schedules were examined with one child in a simultaneous treatment design using praise as the reinforcer (Experiment I), and with two children in separate reversal designs using tokens as the reinforcer (Experiment II). While attentive behavior increased under each schedule, the increase was greater when attentive rather than inattentive behavior preceded the reinforced response. The results indicated that the effect of a contingency may be determined not only by the specific response reinforced but also by the behavior that immediately precedes that response.     

Temporal constraint on choice: Sensitivity and bias in multiple schedules

In multiple schedules of reinforcement, ratios of responses in successive components are relatively insensitive to ratios of obtained reinforcers. An analysis is proposed that attributes changes in absolute response rates to concurrent interactions between programmed reinforcement and extraneous reinforcement in other components. The analysis predicts that ratios of responses in successive components vary with reinforcer ratios, qualified by a term describing the reinforcement context, that is, programmed and extraneous reinforcers. Two main predictions from the analysis were confirmed in an experiment in which pigeons' responses were reinforced in the components of a multiple schedule and analog extraneous reinforcement was scheduled for an alternative response in each component. Sensitivity of response and time ratios to reinforcer ratios in the multiple schedules varied as a function of the rate of extraneous reinforcers. Bias towards responding in one component of the multiple schedule varied as an inverse function of the ratios of extraneous reinforcer rate in the two components. The data from this and previous studies of multiple-concurrent performance were accurately predicted by our analysis and supported our contention that the allocation of behavior in multiple-schedule components depends on the relative values of concurrently-available reinforcers within each component.     

Choice behavior in transition: development of preference for the higher probability of reinforcement.

Ten acquisition curves were obtained from each of 4 pigeons in a two-choice discrete-trial procedure. In each of these 10 conditions, the two response keys initially had equal probabilities of reinforcement, and subjects' choice responses were about equally divided between the two keys. Then the reinforcement probabilities were changed so that one key had a higher probability of reinforcement (the left key in half of the conditions and the right key in the other half), and in nearly every case the subjects developed a preference for this key. The rate of acquisition of preference for this key was faster when the ratio of the two reinforcement probabilities was higher. For instance, acquisition of preference was faster in conditions with reinforcement probabilities of .12 and .02 than in conditions with reinforcement probabilities of .40 and .30, even though the pairs of probabilities differed by .10 in both cases. These results were used to evaluate the predictions of some theories of transitional behavior in choice situations. A trial-by-trial analysis of individual responses and reinforcers suggested that reinforcement had both short-term and long-term effects on choice. The short-term effect was an increased probability of returning to the same key on the one or two trials following a reinforcer. The long-term effect was a gradual increase in the proportion of responses on the key with the higher probability of reinforcement, an increase that usually continued for several hundred trials.     

The effects of delayed reinforcement on free-operant responding

In previous studies of delayed reinforcement, response rate has been found to vary inversely with the response-reinforcer interval. However, in all of these studies the independent variable, response-reinforcer time, was confounded with the number of reinforcers presented in a fixed period of time (reinforcer frequency). In the present study, the frequency of available reinforcers was held constant, while temporal separation between response and reinforcer was independently manipulated. A repeating time cycle, T, was divided into two alternating time periods, t^D and t^Δ. The first response in t^D was reinforced at the end of the prevailing T cycle and extinction prevailed in t^Δ. Two placements for t^D were defined, an early t^D placement in which t^D precedes t^Δ and a late t^D placement in which t^D follows t^Δ. The duration of the early and late t^D was systematically decreased from 30 seconds (i.e., t^D = T) to 0.1 second. Manipulation of t^D placement and duration controlled the temporal separation between response and reinforcement, but it did not affect the frequency of programmed reinforcers, which was 1/T. The results show that early and late t^D placements of equal duration have similar overall effects upon response rate, reinforcer frequency, responses per reinforcer, and obtained response-reinforcer temporal separation. A stepwise regression analysis using log response rate as the dependent variable showed that the obtained delay was a significant first-step variable for six of eight subjects, with obtained reinforcer frequency significant for the remaining two subjects.     

Aftereffects of reinforcement on variable-ratio schedules

On each of variable-ratio 10, 40, and 80 schedules of reinforcement, when rats' lever-pressing rates were stable, the concentration of a liquid reinforcer was varied within sessions. The duration of the postreinforcement pause was an increasing function of the reinforcer concentration, this effect being more marked the higher the schedule parameter. The running rate, calculated by excluding the postreinforcement pause, was unaffected by concentration. The duration of the postreinforcement pause increased with the schedule parameter, but the proportion of the interreinforcement interval taken up by the pause decreased. Consequently, the overall response rate was an increasing function of the schedule parameter; i.e., it was inversely related to reinforcement frequency, contrary to the law of effect. The running rate, however, decreased with the reinforcement frequency, in accord with the law of effect. When 50% of reinforcements were randomly omitted, the postomission pause was shorter than the postreinforcement pause, but the running rate of responses was not affected.     

Human observing: maintained by negative informative stimuli only if correlated with improvement in response efficiency.

Two experiments investigated the effect of observing responses that enabled college students to emit more efficient distributions of reinforced responses. In Experiment 1, the gains of response efficiency enabled by observing were minimized through use of identical low-effort response requirements in two alternating variable-interval schedules. These comprised a mixed schedule of reinforcement; they differed in the number of money-backed points per reinforcer. In each of three choices between two stimuli that varied in their correlation with the variable-interval schedules, the results showed that subjects preferred stimuli that were correlated with the larger average amount of reinforcement. This is consistent with a conditioned-reinforcement hypothesis. Negative informative stimuli--that is, stimuli correlated with the smaller of two rewards--did not maintain as much observing as stimuli that were uncorrelated with amount of reward. In Experiment 2, savings in effort made possible by producing S- were varied within subjects by alternately removing and reinstating the response-reinforcement contingency in a mixed variable-interval/extinction schedule of reinforcement. Preference for an uncorrelated stimulus compared to a negative informative stimulus (S-) decreased for each of six subjects, and usually reversed when observing permitted a more efficient temporal distribution of the responses required for reinforcement; in this case, the responses were pulls on a relatively high-effort plunger. When observing the S- could not improve response efficiency, subjects again chose the control stimulus. All of these results were inconsistent with the uncertainty-reduction hypothesis.