Behavioral contrast during multiple avoidance schedules

Changes were observed in the rate of avoidance responding in both components of a multiple schedule of Sidman-avoidance after the shock frequency was changed in only one component. The rate change in each component was positively correlated, in direction and magnitude, with the change in the relative rate of reinforcement (percentage of total shocks) in that component.     

Schedules using noxious stimuli. III. Responding maintained with response-produced electric shocks

Responding was maintained in two squirrel monkeys under several variations of a 10-min fixed-interval schedule of electric shock presentation. The monkeys were first trained under a 2-min variable-interval schedule of food presentation, and then under a concurrent schedule of food presentation and shock presentation. In one monkey, when shocks (12.6 ma) followed each response during the last minute of an 11-min cycle ending with a timeout period, responding was increased during the first 10 min and suppressed during the last minute of each cycle. When the shock schedule was eliminated, both the enhancement and suppression disappeared, and a steady rate of responding was maintained under the variable-interval schedule. When the food schedule was eliminated, the shock schedule maintained a characteristic fixed-interval pattern of responding during the first 10 min, but suppressed responding during the last minute of each cycle. The fixed-interval pattern of responding was maintained when the timeout period was eliminated and when only one shock could occur at the end of the cycle. In the second monkey, responding under the concurrent food and shock schedule was suppressed when responses produced shocks after 3-min. Under an 11-min cycle, responding continued to be maintained at increasing shock intensities. When the food schedule was eliminated, a fixed-interval pattern of responding was maintained under a 10-min schedule of shock presentation (12.6 ma). Whether response-produced electric shocks suppressed responding or maintained responding depended on the schedule of shock presentation.     

ASSESSING THE ROLE OF EFFORT REDUCTION IN THE REINFORCING EFFICACY OF TIMEOUT FROM AVOIDANCE

Rats responded on concurrent schedules of shock‐postponement or deletion (avoidance) and timeout from avoidance. In Experiment 1, 3 rats' responses on one lever postponed shocks for 20 s and responses on a second lever produced a 1‐min timeout according to a variable‐interval 45‐s schedule. Across conditions, a warning signal (white noise) was presented 19.5 s, 16 s, 12 s, 8 s, or 4 s before an impending shock. Raising the duration of the warning signal increased both avoidance and timeout response rates. Timeout responding, although positively correlated with avoidance responding, was not correlated with the prevailing shock rate. In Experiment 2, 3 rats' responses on one lever deleted scheduled shocks according to a variable‐cycle 30‐s schedule and responses on a second lever produced a 2‐min timeout as described above. After this baseline condition, the avoidance lever was removed and noncontingent shocks were delivered at intervals yoked to the receipt of shocks in the baseline sessions. Timeout responding decreased when the avoidance lever was removed, even though the shock‐frequency reduction afforded by the timeout remained constant. These results suggest that a key factor in the reinforcing efficacy of timeout is suspension of the requirement to work to avoid shock, rather than the reduction in shock frequency associated with timeout.     

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.     

Responding in the cat maintained under response-independent electric shock and response-produced electric shock

Key-pressing responses in the cat were maintained under conditions in which brief electric shock was first postponed by responses (avoidance), then periodically presented independently of responses, and finally produced by responses on a fixed-interval schedule of 15 min (FI 15-min). A steady rate of responding occurred under shock avoidance and under response-independent shock; positively accelerated responding was engendered by the FI 15-min schedule. A second experiment studied responding under second-order schedules composed of three FI 5-min components. Responding was suppressed when a stimulus was presented briefly at completion of each FI 5-min component and a shock followed the brief stimulus at completion of the third component. Responding was maintained when each of the first two components was completed either with or without presentation of a brief stimulus and a shock alone was presented at completion of the third FI 5-min component.     

Indifference between punishment and free shock: evidence for the negative law of effect

Pigeons were trained to respond under two conditions with two identical variable-interval schedules of positive reinforcement. While the schedules operated for separate response keys, they were not available concurrently. During one condition, each response was punished with electric shock. During the other condition, shocks were delivered independently of responding. The punishment suppressed responding but the free shocks did not. However, when allowed to choose, the pigeons preferred the condition associated with the lowest rate of shock regardless of whether or not the shock was dependent on responding. In general, shocks exerted their greatest effect on whichever response had the greatest influence on shocks. In this respect, punishment is instrumental in suppressing behavior and the properties of punishment are symmetrical to those of reinforcement. This empirical symmetry dictates a corresponding conceptual symmetry in terms of a positive law of effect accounting for response increments and a negative law accounting for response decrements.     

On the form of the relation between response rates in a multiple schedule

Three pigeons received training on multiple variable-interval schedules with brief alternating components, concurrently with a fixed-interval schedule of food reinforcement on a second key. Fixed-interval performance exhibited typical increases in rate within the interval, and was independent of multiple-schedule responding. Responding on the multiple-schedule key decreased as a function of proximity to reinforcement on the fixed-interval key. The overall relative rate of responding in one component of the multiple schedule roughly matched the overall relative rate of reinforcement. Within the fixed interval, response rate during one multiple-schedule component was a monotonic, negatively accelerated function of response rate during the other component. To a first approximation, the data were described by a power function, where the exponent depended on the relative rate of reinforcement obtained in the two components. The relative rate of responding in one component of the multiple schedule increased as a function of proximity to fixed-interval reinforcement, and often exceeded the overall obtained relative rate of reinforcement. The form of the function relating response rates is discussed in relation to findings on rate-dependent effects of drugs, chaining, and the relation between response rate and reinforcement rate in single-schedule conditions.     

Behavioral contrast in chained schedules

In each of two experiments, the rate of key pecking maintained by a variable-interval food reinforcement schedule was measured, first when that schedule was studied in isolation, and then when it was correlated with the second component of a two-component chained schedule. In the first experiment, the first component of the chained schedule was correlated with a fixed-interval schedule; in the second experiment it was correlated with a variable-interval schedule. In both experiments, behavioral contrast was demonstrated in the second component of the chained schedule. Compared to the rate of responding on the food-reinforcement schedule when it had operated in isolation, the rate of responding on the food-reinforcement schedule when it was correlated with the second component was higher, while the rate on the schedule of the first component was lower. The results are discussed with reference to the determinants of contrast.     

Stimulus functions in chained fixed-interval schedules

Pigeons were required to complete three successive fixed-interval components to obtain food. When the same exteroceptive stimulus was correlated with the three components, responding was positively accelerated between food deliveries. When different exteroceptive stimuli were correlated with each component in a fixed sequence, prolonged pauses developed in the first component; low response rates developed in the second component; and responding was positively accelerated in the second and third components. When different exteroceptive stimuli were correlated with each component in a variable sequence, responding was positively accelerated in each component. Because the response and reinforcement contingencies were the same in all three procedures, the differences in performances must be due to the changes in the sequence of stimuli.     

Effects of fixed-time shocks and brief stimuli on food-maintained behavior of rats

When a fixed-time schedule of shocks was presented to rats lever pressing for food on a random-interval schedule, a pattern of behavior developed with a high rate of pressing after shock declining to near zero before the next shock was delivered. Once this pattern had stabilized, one-quarter of the shocks were replaced with brief auditory stimuli (tones) in a random sequence. Tone maintained behavior similar to shock, although tone was never paired with shock. Both tone and shocks elicited responding when presented at various times as probe stimuli, and responding was usually totally suppressed if neither stimulus occurred at the beginning of the fixed-time interval. When other stimuli were paired with tone and shock, only those paired with tone gained discriminative control and elicited responding. These findings suggest that stimuli that signal a shock-free, or safe, period will maintain the pattern of behavior generated by shock on a fixed-time schedule. There is a parallel between this phenomenon and the control of behavior on second-order schedules of positive reinforcement with nonpaired brief stimuli.     

Some effects of response-independent shocks after unsignaled avoidance conditioning in rats

After extended unsignaled avoidance training, the majority of rats continued frequent responding during long periods when only response-independent shocks were presented. Most responses were shock elicited, i.e., followed immediately after shock. Response rates were directly related to both the frequency and the intensity of response-independent shocks. Responding continued to approximately the same extent, whether shocks were presented at fixed or variable intervals. Few responses were directed toward a second lever in the test chamber, even when the lever previously associated with avoidance was removed. When avoidance was scheduled on the second lever, the rats learned to avoid by operating it. Meanwhile, responding on the first lever became infrequent. Subsequently, when only response-independent shocks were presented, almost all responses occurred upon the lever initially associated with avoidance. Responding that was elicited by response-independent shocks was suppressed by response-dependent (punishment)_shocks of the same intensity. When punishment was withdrawn, recovery of responding occurred. An explanation of the results based upon shock-elicited behaviors is preferred to one stressing unextinguished avoidance responding.     

Punishment contras during free-operant avoidance

Punishment of bar-pressing responses of rhesus monkeys with electric shock in one component of a multiple free-operant avoidance schedule suppressed responding in that component. These decreases were concomitant with response rate increases in the unpunished component (punishment contrast). Response rates in both components increased when punishment was removed and decreased in successive sessions. These effects of punishment on unpunished responding were similar to those obtained during single and multiple schedules of positive reinforcement and they suggest a further similarity in the development of discriminations during positive and negative reinforcement schedules.     

Preference and response suppression under different correlations between shock and a positive reinforcer in rats

A lever-press response by rats was reinforced by food in two successively presented types of trial signalled by different discriminative stimuli. When responding was punished by a shock in one type of trial, a groups for which the shock always preceded the reinforcer by .5 sec (positive correlation) showed less suppression in those trials than a group which received the shock and food separated in time (negative correlation). When, in a second experiment, rats were given a choice between food alone in one end of a shuttle box and either positively or negatively correlated shock and food in the other on a concurrent schedule, the group receiving the negatively correlated shock showed a greater preference for the food alone end. On the basis of a third experiment in which a tone was substituted for the shock in the choice situation, it was argued that the effect of correlation was not simply due to the stimulus properties of the shock. A final experiment demonstrated that when shock punishment is administered during extinction of the lever-press response, the rate of extinction is slower if the shock has been previously paired with the food reinforcer. Pairing a shock with food seems to attenuate the intrinsic aversiveness of the shock through Pavlovian counterconditioning.     

Control of responding during stimuli that precede transitions in reinforcement frequency

Pigeons' responses were reinforced on a variant of a mixed variable-interval extinction schedule of reinforcement in which the transition to the higher reinforcement rate was signaled by a trace stimulus projected on the response key prior to the onset of the component correlated with food delivery. In the first of two experiments, the duration of the trace stimulus preceding the component correlated with food delivery was varied from 1.5 to 50.0 s and in the second experiment, the reinforcement frequency in the same component was varied from 10 to 60 reinforcers per hour. Pigeons pecked at the trace stimulus preceding the onset of the component correlated with food delivery even though responding was not reinforced in its presence and only one of the changes in reinforcement rate (i.e., from extinction to reinforcement) was signaled. The rate of pecking during the trace stimulus was a function of its duration but not of the reinforcement frequency in the following component. Higher rates generally occurred at the shorter trace-stimulus durations. Component responding following the offset of the trace stimulus was under discriminative control of the trace stimulus whether or not responding occurred in the presence of the trace stimulus.     

Response rate, reinforcement frequency, and conditioned suppression

In the first of two experiments, periods of noise were terminated with unavoidable shock to 36 rats. The rats' continuously reinforced responding was later completely suppressed during the noise when it was introduced without shock. The rats were then assigned to nine experimental groups. Each group was exposed to different paced variable-interval schedules of reinforcement, which independently controlled response rate and reinforcement frequency. Periods of the noise were periodically superimposed on these schedules, and loss of response suppression was studied. Differences between the groups were assessed statistically. The second experiment used a steady-state design. Six rats were exposed to paced schedules which generated two alternating response rates but gave constant reinforcement frequencies, and six rats to schedules which maintained the same response rates throughout, but in which the reinforcement frequency was alternately high and low. Response suppression was studied during a pre-shock stimulus superimposed on each rat's two behavioral baselines. Both experiments suggest that (1) conditioned suppression is affected by rate of operant responding, high rates being most suppressed, and (2) the frequency of reinforcements obtained also has an effect, most suppression occurring when frequency is low.     

Drug-behavior interaction history: modification of the effects of morphine on punished behavior.

Squirrel monkeys were trained to respond under a multiple fixed-interval, fixed-interval schedule in which the first response after 5 min terminated a visual stimulus in the presence of which electric shocks could occur. During one component of the schedule, correlated with one color of stimulus lights, every 30th response also produced electric shock; responding was suppressed during this component to approximately 10 to 12% of that occurring in the alternate component in which responding was not punished. In contrast to previous research, morphine (0.03 to 1.0 mg/kg) increased punished responding. Unpunished responding, however, was either not affected or decreased at doses of morphine that increased punished responding. Increases in rate of punished responding also occurred when the single-schedule punishment condition was studied alone in these animals. Subsequent experimentation, which systematically analyzed the development of the rate-enhancing effects of morphine on punished responding, involved the study of drug effects in additional monkeys trained initially under a single-schedule punishment condition. The effects of morphine on punished responding were studied before, after, and then during exposure to the multiple schedule that included a component in which responding was not punished. Increases in response rate with morphine did not occur until it was administered during exposure to the multiple schedule that included a component in which responding was not punished. As with the other monkeys, once the rate increases in punished responding occurred under the multiple schedule, these effects of morphine persisted, even when the multiple schedule was removed.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Response control with titration of punishment

Pigeons and rats were exposed to multiple schedules with different schedules of electric shock superimposed on identical schedules of food reinforcement during each of two components. During one component, (adjusting-intensity) the intensity of electric shock depended on responding. Each response increased the intensity while intensity decreased between responses. During the other component (constant-intensity) the intensity was fixed at the value at which it had been adjusted at the end of the immediately preceeding adjusting-intensity component. In one experiment, shock was continuous during both components. In another experiment, instead of continuous shock, a brief pulse was delivered immediately after each response. During the adjusting-intensity component of both experiments, pigeons and rats responded at a rate just sufficient to keep the shock constant (critical rate). During the constant-intensity component, responding depended on whether shock was delivered continuously or in pulses. When shock was continuous, response rate during the constant-intensity component was higher than the critical rate. When shock was pulsed, response rate during the constant-intensity component was equal to the critical rate.     

The effect of punishment shock intensity upon responding under multiple schedules

In the first of two experiments, responses of two pigeons were maintained by multiple variable-interval, variable-ratio schedules of food reinforcement. Concurrent punishment was introduced, which consisted of a brief electric shock after each tenth response. The initial punishment intensities had no lasting effect upon responding. Then, as shock intensity increased, variable-ratio response rates were suppressed more quickly than variable-interval response rates. When shock intensity decreased, variable-interval responding recovered more quickly, but the rates under both schedules eventually returned to their pre-punishment levels. In the second experiment, the following conditions were studied in three additional pigeons: (1) With each shock intensity in effect for a number of sessions, punishment shock intensity was gradually increased and decreased and responding was maintained by multiple variable-ratio, fixed-ratio schedules of food reinforcement; (2) Changes in punishment shock intensity as described above with responding maintained by either a variable-ratio or a fixed-ratio schedule, which were presented on alternate days; (3) Session-to-session changes in shock intensity with responding maintained by multiple variable-ratio, fixed-ratio schedules. Responding under the two schedules was suppressed to approximately the same extent by a particular shock intensity. Also, post-reinforcement pauses under the fixed-ratio schedule increased as response suppression increased.     

Conditioned suppression as a sensitive baseline for social facilitation

The key pecking of pigeons maintained on a variable-interval schedule of food reinforcement was suppressed during occasional presentations of a warning stimulus paired with electric shock. On alternate sessions, a co-actor pigeon was visible in an adjoining chamber where it emitted the same food-reinforced key peck during the warning stimulus that signalled shock for the subject. With no shock and at low shock intensities, where the subject's responding was not suppressed or suppressed only slightly, the co-actor had little effect. At the higher shock intensities, where the subject's responding was reduced by at least 40%, the response rate during the warning stimulus was consistently higher when the co-actor was present. One explanation of these results assumes a special relationship between social stimuli and aversive stimuli in which the presence of another animal reduces emotional reactions and thereby allows operant responses to increase. This was not the case here because the mere presence of the co-actor did not maintain social facilitation. Rather, the present results, taken in conjunction with previous findings, suggest that changes in social and non-social variables which affect the rate of food-reinforced responding may produce proportionately larger changes in responding when that responding is suppressed by aversive stimulation than when it is not.     

Autocontingencies: Suppressive and accelerative effects of pairs of shocks superimposed on a positively reinforced operant baseline

Previous research has shown that unsignaled shock may accelerate positively reinforced operant responding if each shock signals a subsequent shock-free period. In order to explore the boundary conditions of this effect, two experiments were performed. In Experiment 1, pairs of unsignaled shocks separated by 15, 30, 60, or 120 seconds resulted in suppressed responding during the briefest intershock interval, and in accelerated responding during the longer intervals. When the second shock in each pair signaled a shock-free period of at least 3 minutes, accelerated responding also followed offset of the second shock in all but the 30-second condition. In Experiment 2, the addition of a conditioned stimulus prior to each pair of shocks restored baseline responding, and eliminated accelerative control following the second shock only under the briefest inter-shock interval. The results are discussed in terms of the similarity between autocontingencies (shock/no-shock relations; Davis, Memmott, & Hurwitz, 1975) and recent modifications of the feature-positive procedure (e.g., Reberg & Memmott, 1979), which stress stimulus control by shock/no-shock relationships.