Response induction during the acquisition and maintenance of lever pressing with delayed reinforcement

The acquisition of lever pressing by rats and the occurrence of unreinforced presses at a location different from that of the reinforced response were studied using different delays of reinforcement. An experimental chamber containing seven identical adjoining levers was used. Only presses on the central (operative) lever produced food pellets. Groups of 3 rats were exposed to one of seven different tandem random-interval (RI) fixed-time (FT) schedules. The average RI duration was the complement of the FT duration such that their sum yielded a nominal 32-s interreinforcement interval on average. Response rate on the operative lever decreased as the FT value was lengthened. The spatial distribution of responses on the seven levers converged on the operative lever when the FT was 0 or 2 s and spread across the seven levers as the FT value was lengthened to 16 or 32 s. Presses on the seven levers were infrequent during the FT schedule. Both operative- and inoperative-lever pressing intertwined in repetitive patterns that were consistent within subjects but differed between subjects. These findings suggest that reinforcer delay determined the response-induction gradient.     

Acquisition of lever-press responding in rats with delayed reinforcement: A comparison of three procedures

The present study examined the acquisition of lever pressing in rats under three procedures in which food delivery was delayed by 4, 8, and 16 seconds relative to the response. Under the nonresetting delay procedure, food followed the response selected for reinforcement after a specified interval elapsed; responses during this interval had no programmed effect. Under the resetting procedure, the response selected for reinforcement initiated an interval to food delivery that was reset by each subsequent response. Under the stacked delay procedure, every response programmed delivery of food t seconds after its occurrence. Two control groups were studied, one that received food immediately after each lever press and another that never received food. With the exception of the group that did not receive food, responding was established with every procedure at every delay value without autoshaping or shaping. Although responding was established under the resetting delay procedure, response rates were generally not as high as under the other two procedures. These findings support the results of other recent investigations in demonstrating that a response not previously reinforced can be brought to strength by delayed reinforcement in the absence of explicit training.     

Drug discrimination in rats under concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules

Eight rats were trained to discriminate pentobarbital from saline under a concurrent variable-interval (VI) VI schedule, on which responses on the pentobarbital-biased lever after pentobarbital were reinforced under VI 20 s and responses on the saline-biased lever were reinforced under VI 80 s. After saline, the reinforcement contingencies programmed on the two levers were reversed. The rats made 62.3% of their responses on the pentobarbital-biased lever after pentobarbital and 72.2% on the saline-biased lever after saline, both of which are lower than predicted by the matching law. When the schedule was changed to concurrent VI 50 s VI 50 s for test sessions with saline and the training dose of pentobarbital, responding on the pentobarbital-biased lever after the training dose of pentobarbital and on the saline-biased lever after saline became nearly equal, even during the first 2 min of the session, suggesting that the presence or absence of the training drug was exerting minimal control over responding and making the determination of dose-effect relations of drugs difficult to interpret. When the pentobarbital dose-response curve was determined under the concurrent VI 50-s VI 50-s schedule, responding was fairly evenly distributed on both levers for most rats. Therefore, 6 additional rats were trained to respond under a concurrent VI 60-s VI 240-s schedule. Under this schedule, the rats made 62.6% of their responses on the pentobarbital-biased lever after pentobarbital and 73.5% of their responses on the saline-biased lever after saline, which also is lower than the percentages predicted by perfect matching. When the schedule was changed to a concurrent VI 150-s VI 150-s schedule for 5-min test sessions with additional drugs, the presence or absence of pentobarbital continued to control responding in most rats, and it was possible to generate graded dose-response curves for pentobarbital and other drugs using the data from these 5-min sessions. The dose-response curves generated under these conditions were similar to the dose-response curves generated using other reinforcement schedules and other species.     

Contingency tracking during unsignaled delayed reinforcement

Three experiments were conducted with rats in which responses on one lever (labeled the functional lever) produced reinforcers after an unsignaled delay period that reset with each response during the delay. Responses on a second, nonfunctional, lever did not initiate delays, but, in the first and third experiments, such responses during the last 10 s of a delay did postpone food delivery another 10 s. In the first experiment, the location of the two levers was reversed several times. Responding generally was higher on the functional lever, though the magnitude of the difference diminished with successive reversals. In the second experiment, once a delay was initiated by a response on the functional lever, in different conditions responses on the nonfunctional lever either had no effect or postponed food delivery by 30 s. The latter contingency typically lowered response rates on the nonfunctional lever. In the first two experiments, both the functional and nonfunctional levers were identical except for their location; in the third experiment, initially, a vertically mounted, pole-push lever defined the functional response and a horizontally mounted lever defined the nonfunctional response. Higher response rates occurred on the functional lever. These results taken together suggest that responding generally tracked the response-reinforcer contingency. The results further show how nonfunctional-operanda responses are controlled by a prior history of direct reinforcement of such responses, by the temporal delay between such responses and food delivery, and as simple generalization between the two operanda.     

Effects of reinforcement rate and delay on the acquisition of lever pressing by rats.

The acquisition of lever pressing by naive rats, in the absence of shaping, was studied as a function of different rates and unsignaled delays of reinforcement. Groups of 3 rats were each exposed to tandem schedules that differed in either the first or the second component. First-component schedules were either continuous reinforcement or random-interval 15, 30, 60 or 120 s; second-component schedules were fixed-time 0, 1, 3, 6, 12, or 24 s. Rate of responding was low under continuous immediate reinforcement and higher under random-interval 15 s. Random interval 30-s and 60-s schedules produced lower rates that were similar to each other. Random-interval 120 s controlled the lowest rate in the immediate-reinforcement condition. Adding a constant 12-s delay to each of the first-component schedule parameters controlled lower response rates that did not vary systematically with reinforcement rate. The continuous and random-interval 60-s schedules of immediate reinforcement controlled higher global and first-component response rates than did the same schedules combined with longer delays, and first-component rates showed some graded effects of delay duration. In addition, the same schedules controlled higher second-component response rates in combination with a 1-s delay than in combination with longer delays. These results were related to those from previous studies on acquisition with delayed reinforcement as well as to those from similar reinforcement procedures used during steady-state responding.     

Effects of schedule of reinforcement on a pentobarbital discrimination in rats.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of the schedule of reinforcement on a pentobarbital discrimination in rats. Five rats were trained to discriminate 10 mg/kg pentobarbital from saline under a multiple fixed-interval 180-s fixed-ratio 20 schedule of reinforcement. During both saline and pentobarbital training sessions, subjects emitted a higher percentage of correct responses under the fixed-ratio component as compared to the fixed-interval component of the multiple schedule. Determination of the pentobarbital dose-response curve under the fixed-ratio component resulted in a steep curve characterized by responding on the saline lever at low doses and on the drug lever at higher doses. Under the fixed-interval component, a graded dose-effect curve was produced, with considerable responding on both levers after intermediate doses of pentobarbital. The administration of phencyclidine and MK-801 resulted in an intermediate level of drug-lever responding for some subjects. Administration of d-amphetamine resulted in saline (nondrug) appropriate responding. The results of this study demonstrate that the schedule of reinforcement is a determinant of drug stimulus control, just as it is a determinant of other drug effects.     

Punishment and the potential for negative reinforcement with histamine injection

The present study examined punishment of responding with histamine injection, and its potential to generate avoidance of punishment. Sprague–Dawley rats were trained under concurrent schedules in which responses on one lever (the punishment lever) produced food under a variable‐interval schedule, and under some conditions intermittent injections of histamine, which suppressed behavior. Responses on a second (avoidance) lever prevented histamine injections scheduled on the punishment lever. After stabilization of punished responding, a variable‐interval 15‐s schedule of cancellation of histamine (avoidance) was added for responding on the second/avoidance lever, without subsequent acquisition of responding on that lever. Progressive decreases in the length of the punishment variable‐interval schedule increased suppression on the punishment lever without increases in response rates on the avoidance lever. Exchanging contingencies on the levers ensured that response rates on the avoidance lever were sufficiently high to decrease the histamine injection frequency; nonetheless response rates on the avoidance lever decreased over subsequent sessions. Under no condition was responding maintained on the avoidance lever despite continued punishing effectiveness of histamine throughout. The present results suggest that avoidance conditioning is not a necessary condition for effective punishment, and confirm the importance of empirical rather than presumed categorization of behavioral effects of stimulus events.     

Free-operant acquisition with delayed reinforcement

The acquisition of free-operant lever pressing by hungry rats was investigated under a schedule in which the first lever press in each second programmed a reinforcer delivery after a fixed delay. In two studies acquisition was observed under programmed delays ranging between 0 and 32 sec, although animals trained with a delay of 64 sec pressed no more than yoked, non-contingent controls. In the final study an attempt was made to enhance sensitivity to the instrumental contingency under a 64-sec delay by exposing the animals to the operant chamber in the absence of the lever prior to each training session. Only animals receiving such exposure pressed significantly more than their non-contingent controls.     

Acquisition of cocaine self-administration with unsignaled delayed reinforcement in rhesus monkeys

Six experimentally naive rhesus monkeys produced 0.01 mg/kg/infusion cocaine by lever pressing under a tandem fixed-ratio 1 differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior schedule. One lever press initiated an unsignaled 15- or 30-s delay culminating in cocaine delivery. Each press made during the delay reset the delay interval. With two exceptions, responding was acquired and maintained at higher rates than responding on a second (inoperative) lever. For the exceptions, a cancellation contingency was arranged in which each formerly inoperative-lever response reset the tandem schedule. This manipulation reduced presses on the inoperative lever. Subsequently, the consequences of responding on the two levers were reversed, and the monkeys again responded at higher rates on the operative lever. As a comparison, 3 additional experimentally naive monkeys received response-independent cocaine deliveries. Although lever pressing was observed, it extinguished and was subsequently reestablished under the tandem schedule. The results suggest that although response-reinforcer contiguity is not required for cocaine to acquire reinforcing functions, a response-reinforcer relation appears necessary.     

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.     

Behavioral effects of delayed timeouts from reinforcement

Timeouts are sometimes used in applied settings to reduce target responses, and in some circumstances delays are unavoidably imposed between the onset of a timeout and the offset of the response that produces it. The present study examined the effects of signaled and unsignaled timeouts in rats exposed to concurrent fixed‐ratio 1 fixed‐ratio 1 schedules of food delivery, where each response on one lever, the location of which changed across conditions, produced both food and a delayed 10‐s timeout. Delays of 0 to 38 s were examined. Delayed timeouts often, but not always, substantially reduced the number of responses emitted on the lever that produced timeouts relative to the number emitted on the lever that did not produce timeouts. In general, greater sensitivity was observed to delayed timeouts when they were signaled. These results demonstrate that delayed timeouts, like other delayed consequences, can affect behavior, albeit less strongly than immediate consequences.     

Choice and delay of reinforcement: Effects of terminal-link stimulus and response conditions

In two experiments, pigeons were exposed to concurrent-chains schedules in which a single initial-link variable-interval schedule led to access to terminal links composed of fixed-interval or fixed-delay schedules. In Experiment 1, an 8-s (or 16-s) delay to reinforcement was associated with the standard key, while reinforcer delay values associated with the experimental key were varied from 4 to 32 s. The results of Experiment 1 showed undermatching of response ratios to delay ratios with terminal-link fixed-delay schedules, whereas in some pigeons matching or overmatching was evident with the fixed-interval schedules. In Experiment 2, one pair of reinforcer delay values, either 8 versus 16 s or 16 versus 32 s, was used. In the first condition of Experiment 2, different delays were associated with different keylight stimuli (cued condition). In the second condition, different terminal-link delays were associated with the same stimulus, either a blackout (uncued-blackout condition) or a white key (uncued-white condition). To examine the role of responses emitted during delays, the keys were retracted during a delay (key-absent condition) in the third condition and responses were required by a fixed-interval schedule in the fourth condition. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the choice proportions for the shorter delay were more extreme in the cued condition than in the uncued-blackout condition, and that the response requirement imposed by the fixed-interval schedules did not affect choice of the shorter delay, nor did the key-absent and key-present conditions. These results indicate that the keylight-stimulus conditions affected preference for the shorter of two delays and that the findings obtained in Experiment 1 depended mainly on the keylight-stimulus conditions of the terminal links (i.e., the conditioned reinforcing value of the terminal-link stimuli).     

Effects of D-amphetamine on response acquisition with immediate and delayed reinforcement.

The present study examined in 8-hour sessions the effects of d-amphetamine (1.0, 5.6, and 10 mg/kg) on the acquisition of lever-press responding in rats that were exposed to procedures in which water delivery was delayed by 0, 8, or 16 seconds relative to the response that produced it. Both nonresetting- and resetting-delay conditions were studied. Although neither shaping nor autoshaping occurred, substantial levels of operative-lever responding developed under all conditions in which responses produced water. The lowest dose (1.0 mg/kg) of d-amphetamine either had no effect on or increased operative-lever pressing, whereas higher doses typically produced an initial reduction in lever pressing. Nonetheless, overall rates of operative-lever pressing at these doses were as high as, or higher than, those observed with vehicle. Thus, response acquisition was observed under all reinforcement procedures at all drug doses. In the absence of the drug, most responding occurred on the operative lever when reinforcement was immediate. Such differential responding also developed under both nonresetting- and resetting-delay procedures when the delay was 8 seconds, but not when it was 16 seconds. d-Amphetamine did not affect the development of differential responding under any procedure. Thus, consistent with d-amphetamine's effects under repeated acquisition procedures, the drug had no detrimental effect on learning until doses that produced general behavioral disruption were administered.     

Reinforcement Delay Fading During Differential Reinforcement of Communication: The Effects of Signals on Response Maintenance

Signals during delays to reinforcement may lessen reductions in responding that typically occur when there is a delay between a response and its reinforcer. Sparse applied research has been devoted to understanding the conditions under which responding may be maintained when delays to reinforcement are introduced. We evaluated the extent to which providing signals during delay fading affected responding in the context of differential reinforcement of communication responses. Three individuals were exposed to gradually increasing signaled and unsignaled reinforcement delays in multiple‐schedule and/or withdrawal designs. Results for 2 of 3 participants suggested that (a) the presence of signals facilitated response maintenance under delayed reinforcement and (b) coordinated basic and applied research may advance both conceptual understanding and clinical outcomes of delayed reinforcement.     

Briefly delayed reinforcement: An interresponse time analysis

Key-peck responding of pigeons was compared under VI or DRL schedules arranging immediate reinforcement and briefly (.5 sec) delayed reinforcement. Delays were either signaled by a blackout in the chamber, unsignaled, or unsignaled with an additional requirement that responding not occur during the .5 sec interval immediately preceding reinforcement (response delay). Relative to the immediate reinforcement condition, response rates increased during the unsignaled delay, decreased during the signaled delay, and were inconsistent during the response delay condition. An analysis of interresponse times (IRTs) under the different conditions revealed a substantial increase in the frequency of short (0 to .5 sec) IRTs during the unsignaled condition and generally during the response delay conditions compared to that during the immediate reinforcement baseline. Signaled delays decreased the frequency of short (0 to .5 sec) IRTs relative to the immediate reinforcement condition. The results suggest that brief unsignaled delays and, in many instances, response delays increase the frequency of short IRTs by eliminating constraints on responding.     

Body weight and response acquisition with delayed reinforcement.

The relation between body weight and responding established with unsignaled delayed reinforcement was investigated. In three experiments, naive rats were deprived to either 70%, 80%, or 90% of ad libitum weight and were then exposed to tandem variable-interval 15-s differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior 30-s schedules. The tandem schedule defined a resetting unsignaled delay-of-reinforcement procedure. In the first experiment, speed of magazine training, acquisition of lever pressing, and final rate of lever pressing were related to body weight. In the next experiment, lever pressing was established and maintained in rats that were magazine trained at 70% of ad libitum weight but that were then exposed to the delay procedure at 90% of ad libitum weight. Responding did not change consistently either across or within subjects in subsequent conditions in which body weight was manipulated. In the final experiment, lever pressing was established and maintained with delayed reinforcement in the absence of magazine training for each of 2 rats at 70% and for 1 of 2 rats at 90% of ad libitum weight. The results further illuminate the conditions under which responding can be established in the absence of training and when such responses are reinforced only following an unsignaled delay period.     

Conditioned suppression of counting behavior in rats

Three rats were trained on a schedule in which a response on lever B was reinforced only if it was preceded by a minimum number of consecutive responses on lever A. The minimum requirement was 27 A responses for Rat 1, and 20 A responses for Rats 2 and 3. The schedule maintained high rates of responding on lever A, and a slow, spaced pattern of responding on lever B. The mean number of consecutive responses on lever A was slightly greater than the minimum required. The effect of superimposing on this behavior a stimulus that ended with an unavoidable shock was the suppression of responding on both levers during the pre-shock stimulus. Responses on lever A were more suppressed, and the proportion of relatively short response runs on lever A during the pre-shock stimulus increased. With all three rats, the mean number of consecutive responses on lever A during the pre-shock stimulus decreased to a value below the minimum requirement for reinforcement of the subsequent B response.     

Choice in the time-left procedure and in concurrent chains with a time-left terminal link.

In two experiments, rats chose between a standard fixed-duration food-associated stimulus and a stimulus whose duration was the time remaining to reinforcement in an elapsing comparison interval. In Experiment 1, 4 rats responded in a time-left procedure wherein a single initial-link variable-interval schedule set up two potential terminal links simultaneously. As time elapsed in the initial-link schedule, the choice was between a standard fixed-interval 30-s terminal link and a time-left terminal link whose programmed interval requirement equaled 90 s minus the elapsed time in the initial link. Rats generally responded more on the lever with the shortest programmed terminal-link duration, but the temporal parameters of the procedure were found to vary with response distributions. Contrary to previous reports, therefore, time-left data were well predicted by choice models that make no assumptions about animal timing. In Experiment 2, 8 rats responded on a concurrent-chains schedule with independent variable-interval initial links and a time-left terminal link in one of the choice schedules. On the time-left lever, the programmed terminal-link delay equaled 90 s minus the elapsed time in the time-left initial link. On the standard lever, terminal-link responses were reinforced according to a variable-interval schedule whose average value varied over four conditions. Relative time-left initial-link responses increased in the elapsing time-left initial-link schedule as the time-left terminal link became shorter relative to the standard terminal link. Scalar expectancy theory failed to predict the resultant data, but a modified version of the delay-reduction model made good predictions. An analysis of the elaboration of scalar expectancy theory for variable delays demonstrated that the model is poorly formulated for arithmetically distributed delays.     

Instrumental performance on negative schedules

Three experiments examined the performance of rats pressing a lever for food reinforcement on a schedule in which high rates of response resulted in lowered rates of reinforcement (i.e. a schedule with a negative component). In Experiment 1, rats responded on a variable interval (VI) schedule with a conjoint component such that every 30 responses a reinforcement programmed by the VI schedule was cancelled. These subjects generally emitted a lower response rate than rats responding on a VI schedule yoked to the former subjects with respect to the delivery of reinforcement, although response rate differences were sometimes not large. Similar response-rate effects were obtained in Experiment 2 using a within-subject yoking procedure. In Experiment 3, reinforced interresponse times were matched on negative and VI schedules yoked in terms of reinforcement rate, and the response rate emitted in these conditions were similar. These results give support to theories of instrumental conditioning that stress the strengthening and shaping properties of reinforcement.     

DISCRIMINATION ACQUISITION IN CHILDREN WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES UNDER IMMEDIATE AND DELAYED REINFORCEMENT

We evaluated the discrimination acquisition of individuals with developmental disabilities under immediate and delayed reinforcement. In Experiment 1, discrimination between two alternatives was examined when reinforcement was immediate or delayed by 20 s, 30 s, or 40 s. In Experiment 2, discrimination between 2 alternatives was compared across an immediate reinforcement condition and a delayed reinforcement condition in which subjects could respond during the delay. In Experiment 3, discrimination among 4 alternatives was compared across immediate and delayed reinforcement. In Experiment 4, discrimination between 2 alternatives was examined when reinforcement was immediate and 0‐s or 30‐s intertrial intervals (ITI) were programmed. For most subjects, discrimination acquisition occurred under immediate reinforcement. However, for some subjects, introducing delays slowed or prevented discrimination acquisition under some conditions. Results from Experiment 4 suggest that longer ITIs cannot account for the lack of discrimination under delayed reinforcement.