Contrast effects in multiple fixed-interval reinforcement schedules

Pigeons were exposed to a multiple fixed-interval one-minute fixed-interval three-minute schedule of reinforcement following training on either a multiple fixed-interval one-minute fixed-interval one-minute schedule or a multiple fixed-interval three-minute fixed-interval three-minute schedule. For all birds, large negative local contrast effects developed during the first of four three-minute intervals in a component; response rate was depressed and postreinforcement pause lengthened in this interval. Positive local contrast effects were evident during the first of 12 one-minute intervals in a component for five of six birds; at asymptote, the pause was very short and response rate slightly elevated during this interval. Overall positive contrast was generally transient and varied considerably across subjects, while overall negative contrast effects, if they occurred, appeared only after a large number of sessions.     

Additional-delay schedules: A continuum of temporal contingencies by varying food delay

Pigeons performed on discrete-trial, temporally defined schedules in which the food delay (D) was adjusted according to the latency of the key peck (X) and two schedule parameters (t and A). The schedule function was D = A(t − X), where D is the experienced delay between a response and a reinforcer. The schedule parameter t is the maximum value below which the present contingencies occur. A is the additional delay to reinforcement for each second the response latency is shorter than the t value. When A = 0 s, the schedule is a continuous reinforcement schedule with immediate reinforcement. When A = 1 s, the schedule is a conjunctive fixed-ratio 1 fixed-time t-s schedule. When A approaches infinity, the schedule becomes a differential reinforcement of long latency schedule. The latencies for subjects with t = 10 s and t = 30 s were observed with the present schedules having seven values for A between 0 s and 11 s. In addition, the latencies for subjects for which t = 30 s were observed at an A value of 31 s to 41 s. As the A value increased, the latencies approached the t value for subjects for which t = 10 s. The latencies for 30-s-t subjects did not approach t, even when the A value was 41 s. The latencies for 10-s-t subjects at 11-s A value were longer than those under yoked conditions having exactly the same delays/interreinforcement intervals. These results demonstrated a continuum of latency related to the schedule continuum (value of A) at a small t value.     

Conjunctive schedules of reinforcement: III. A fixed-interval adjusting fixed-ratio schedule

Key pecking of three pigeons was studied under a conjunctive schedule that specified both a fixed-interval and an adjusting fixed-ratio requirement. The fixed-interval schedule was 6 min for one pigeon and 3 min for the other two. The size of the ratio requirement was determined within each cycle of the fixed interval by the duration of the pause before responding began. The fixed-ratio value was at maximum at the start of each fixed interval and decreased linearly until the first response occurred (adjusting fixed-ratio schedule). A peck produced food when the number of responses remaining on the fixed-ratio schedule was completed and when the fixed interval had elapsed. If no response occurred during the interval, the fixed-ratio requirement decreased to one and a single response after the interval elapsed produced food. The initial value of the adjusting fixed-ratio schedule was studied over a range of 0 to 900. Increases in the adjusting fixed-ratio schedule to about 300 responses increased both pause duration and running response rate and also modified the pattern of responding from that obtained under the fixed-interval schedule. Higher values of the adjusting fixed ratio generally decreased pause duration and running response rate and also disrupted responding. Interreinforcement time under the conjunctive schedule was increased substantially when the adjusting fixed-ratio size exceeded 300 responses.     

Selective punishment early and late in fixed-ratio schedules of food reinforcement

Pigeons key pecked for grain on a fixed-ratio 100 schedule; electric shocks occurred intermittently at the fifteenth or eighty-fifth response in the ratio. In Experiment I, shock was at the fifteenth response for two birds, and at the eighty-fifth response for two others, in every sixth, twelfth, or eighteenth ratio. Rate of responding decreased as frequency of shock increased, and the pattern of responding included an increased initial pause and low rates or pause-run sequences that extended further into the ratio when shock was at the fifteenth response than when it was at the eighty-fifth response. Shock early in the ratio engendered longer initial pauses than shock late in the ratio. In Experiment II, four birds responded on a two-component multiple schedule in which shock occurred at the fifteenth response of the third ratio in the presence of a white keylight and at the eighty-fifth response of the third ratio in the presence of a green keylight. The overall rates of responding decreased as shock intensity increased. All four birds responded differentially to the white and green keylights, but with a pattern that varied between birds. In general, punishment reduced the probability of responses that preceded it, regardless of the ordinal position of those responses. Both studies confirm that the probability of responding is reduced less by aversive stimuli produced late in a fixed-ratio than by aversive stimuli produced early in a fixed-ratio.     

Unsignalled delay of reinforcement in variable-interval schedules

Three pigeons responded on several tandem variable-interval fixed-time schedules in which the value of the fixed-time component was varied to assess the effects of different unsignalled delays of reinforcement. Actual (obtained) delays between the last key peck in an interval and reinforcement were consistently shorter than the nominal (programmed) delay. When nominal delays were relatively short, response rates were higher during the delay condition than during the corresponding nondelay condition. At longer nominal delay intervals, response rates decreased monotonically with increasing delays. The results were consistent with those obtained from delay-of-reinforcement procedures that impose either a stimulus change (signal) or a no-response requirement during the delay interval.     

Conditioned reinforcement and discrimination in second-order schedules

Pigeons were exposed to multiple second-order schedules in which responding on the “main key” was reinforced according to either a variable-interval or fixed-interval schedule by production of a brief stimulus on the “brief-stimulus key”. A response was required to the brief stimulus during its fourth (final) presentation to produce food; responses to the earlier brief stimuli indicated the extent to which the final brief stimulus was discriminated from preceding ones. Main-key response rates were higher in early components of paired brief-stimulus schedules, in which each brief stimulus was the same as that paired with reinforcement, than in comparable unpaired brief-stimulus or tandem schedules. Poor discrimination occurred between paired brief stimuli (Experiment I). When chain stimuli on the main key induced a discrimination between the first two and second two brief stimuli, the response-rate enhancement in the paired brief-stimulus schedule persisted (Experiment II). Rate enhancement diminished when the initial link of the chain included the first three components (Experiment IV). Eliminating the contingency between responding and brief-stimulus production also diminished rate enhancement (Experiment III). The results show that the discriminative and conditioned reinforcing effects of food-paired brief stimuli may be selectively manipulated and suggest that the reinforcing effects are modulated by other reinforcers in the situation.     

Concurrent second-order schedules of reinforcement

Responses on one key (the main key) of a two-key chamber produced food according to a second-order variable-interval schedule with fixed-interval schedule components. A response on a second key (the changeover key) alternated colors on the main key and provided a second independent second-order variable-interval schedule with fixed-interval components. The fixed-interval component on one variable-interval schedule was held constant at 8 sec, while the fixed interval on the other variable-interval schedule was varied from 0 to 32 sec. Under some conditions, a brief stimulus terminated each fixed interval and generated fixed-interval patterns; in other conditions, the brief stimulus was omitted. Relative response rate and relative time deviated substantially from scheduled relative reinforcement rate and, to a lesser extent, from obtained relative reinforcement rate under both brief-stimulus and no-stimulus conditions. Matching was observed with equal components on both schedules; with unequal components, increasingly greater proportions of time and responses than the matching relation would predict were spent on the variable-interval schedule containing the shorter component. Preference for the shorter fixed interval was typically more extreme under brief-stimulus than under no-stimulus schedules. The results limit the extension of the matching relation typically observed under simple concurrent variable-interval schedules to concurrent second-order variable-interval schedules.     

Contingency and stimulus change in chained schedules of reinforcement

Higher rates of pecking were maintained by pigeons in the middle component of three-component chained fixed-interval schedules than in that component of corresponding multiple schedules (two extinction components followed by a fixed-interval component). This rate difference did not occur in equivalent tandem and mixed schedules, in which a single stimulus was correlated with the three components. The higher rates in components of chained schedules demonstrate a reinforcing effect of the stimulus correlated with the next component; the acquired functions of this stimulus make the vocabulary of conditioned reinforcement appropriate. Problems in defining conditioned reinforcement arise not from difficulties in demonstrating reinforcing effects but from disagreements about which experimental operations allow such reinforcing effects to be called conditioned.     

Preference for less segmented fixed-time components in concurrent-chain schedules of reinforcement

A concurrent-chain procedure was used to examine choice between segmented and less segmented response-independent schedules of reinforcement. A pair of independent, concurrent variable-interval 60-s schedules were presented in the initial link, along with a 1.5-s changeover delay. A chained fixed-interval fixed-time and its corresponding tandem schedule constituted the terminal links. The length of the fixed-interval schedule in the terminal link was varied between 5 s and 30 s while that of the fixed-time schedule was kept at 5 s over conditions. The first components of both terminal-link schedules were accompanied by the same stimulus. Except in the baseline condition, the onset of the second component of the terminal-link chained schedule was accompanied by either a localized (key color) or a nonlocalized (dark houselight) stimulus change. Stimulus conditions were constant during the terminal-link tandem schedule. With three exceptions, pigeons demonstrated a slight preference for the tandem over the chained schedule in the terminal link. Furthermore, this preference varied inversely with the length of the first component. In general, these results are consistent with previous studies that reported an adverse effect on choice by segmenting an interval schedule into two or more components, but they are inconsistent with studies that reported preference for signaled over unsignaled delay of reinforcement.     

Order and chaos in fixed-interval schedules of reinforcement

Fixed-interval schedule performance is characterized by high levels of variability. Responding is absent at the onset of the interval and gradually increases in frequency until reinforcer delivery. Measures of behavior also vary drastically and unpredictably between successive intervals. Recent advances in the study of nonlinear dynamics have allowed researchers to study irregular and unpredictable behavior in a number of fields. This paper reviews several concepts and techniques from nonlinear dynamics and examines their utility in predicting the behavior of pigeons responding to a fixed-interval schedule of reinforcement. The analysis provided fairly accurate a priori accounts of response rates, accounting for 92.8% of the variance when predicting response rate 1 second in the future and 64% of the variance when predicting response rates for each second over the entire next interreinforcer interval. The nonlinear dynamics account suggests that even the “noisiest” behavior might be the product of purely deterministic mechanisms.     

The contribution of an added counter to a fixed-ratio schedule

Although previous research showed that a visual counter increased the rate of responding on a large fixed-ratio schedule, a theoretical analysis of the factors responsible for fixed-ratio performance suggests that the primary control by number of responses since reinforcement is to weaken the performance. The present experiment employed a multiple schedule in which the same fixed-ratio value alternated with and without an added counter. It tested the hypothesis that the differential reinforcement of high-rate responding masked the attenuation of the fixed-ratio performance from the unoptimal discriminative control produced by the fixed relation between number of responses and reinforcement. In the present experiment the postreinforcement pause was consistently longer in the components with the added counter, while running rates remained comparable between the components of the multiple schedule. Both components of the multiple schedule involved differential reinforcement of high-rate responding while only the components with the added counter amplified the discriminative control by number of pecks since reinforcement.     

Time allocation in concurrent schedules: the effect of signalled reinforcement

The responses of five pigeons were reinforced on concurrent variable-interval variable-interval reinforcement schedules in which changeover key responses changed the stimulus and reinforcement schedules associated with the food key. While the reinforcement availability in one component remained unchanged throughout the experiment, the reinforcement availability in the other component was, during several conditions, signalled by the onset of an additional discriminative stimulus. During unsignalled conditions, both the relative frequency of responding and the relative time spent in each component approximated the obtained relative reinforcement frequency in each component. The effect of signalling reinforcer availability in one component was to (1) reduce responding in the signalled component to near-zero levels, and (2) increase the relative time in the unsignalled component, without a corresponding increase in the obtained relative reinforcement frequency. The magnitude of the increase in relative time in the unsignalled component decreased as the overall frequency of reinforcement increased. This deviation in the matching relation between relative time and the obtained relative reinforcement frequency was eliminated if the overall reinforcement frequency was increased before the signal was introduced and then, without removing the signal, gradually reduced.     

Effects of reinforcement history on responding under progressive-ratio schedules of reinforcement.

The effects of experimental history on responding under a progressive-ratio schedule of reinforcement were examined. Sixteen pigeons were divided into four equal groups. Groups 1 to 3 were trained to peck a key for food under a fixed-ratio, variable-ratio, or differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule of reinforcement. After training, these pigeons were shifted to a progressive-ratio schedule, later were shifted back to their original schedule (with decreased rates of reinforcement), and finally were returned to the progressive-ratio schedule. Pigeons in Group 4 (control) were maintained on the progressive-ratio schedule for the entire experiment. To test for potential "latent history" effects, pigeons responding under the progressive-ratio schedule were injected with d-amphetamine and given behavioral-momentum tests of prefeeding and extinction. Experimental histories affected responding in the immediate transition to the progressive-ratio schedule; response rates of pigeons with variable-ratio and fixed-ratio histories were higher than rates of pigeons with differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate and progressive-ratio-only histories. Pigeons with differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate histories, and to a lesser degree pigeons with variable-ratio and fixed-ratio histories, also had shorter postreinforcement pauses than pigeons with only a progressive-ratio history. No consistent long-term effects of prior contingencies on responding under the progressive-ratio schedule were evident. d-Amphetamine and resistance-to-change tests failed to reveal consistent latent history effects. The data suggest that history effects are sometimes transitory and not susceptible to latent influences.     

Separating the reinforcing and discriminative properties of brief-stimulus presentations in second-order schedules.

Pigeons' responses were maintained under multiple schedules to study properties of briefly presented stimuli. Responses in one component produced food according to a second-order schedule with fixed-interval components in which food or a brief stimulus occurred with equal probability. In the second component responses produced only the brief stimulus under a fixed-ratio schedule. Under various conditions the brief stimulus in the first component was (a) paired with food, (b) not paired with food, (c) partially omitted, or (d) scheduled simultaneously with the second-order schedule under an independent variable-interval schedule. Paired and nonpaired brief stimuli maintained similar response patterning in the second-order schedule. However, only paired stimuli maintained responses in the second component. The data suggest that nonpaired brief stimuli engender response patterning in second-order schedules as a result of their discriminative properties. When the stimulus is paired with food, these discriminative properties sometime mask a reinforcement effect, and no change in response patterning is observed. When the discriminative properties of the brief stimulus are absent, the reinforcing effects of pairing the brief stimulus with food may be observed.     

Conditioned reinforcement as a function of duration of stimulus

Pigeons were provided with three keys. Pecking the center key produced grain on a schedule that alternated at unpredictable times between a variable-interval component and extinction. On concurrent variable-interval schedules, pecking either side key produced a stimulus associated with the variable-interval component on the center key provided that said schedule was currently in effect. The independent variable was the length of time this stimulus remained on the keys. Pecking one side key produced the stimulus for 27 seconds, whereas the duration produced by pecking the other key varied for successive blocks of sessions. For the first four birds, the values tested were 3, 9, 27, and 81 seconds. For the second group, numbering three birds, the values tested were 1, 3, 9, and 27 seconds. The dependent variable was the proportion of total side key pecks that occurred on the variable key. For all birds, the function was positive in slope and negative in acceleration. This finding supports a formulation that ascribes the maintenance of observing responses in a normal setting to the fact that the subject exposes itself to the positive discriminative stimulus for a longer mean duration than it does to the negative stimulus.     

Preference and discrimination between response-dependent and response-independent schedules of reinforcement

Four Asian quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica) were exposed to concurrent-chain schedules, the terminal links of which were either variable-interval 30 sec and variable-time 30 sec, or fixed-interval 30 sec and fixed-time 30 sec. Except for one bird that exhibited a preference for the variable-interval schedule over the variable-time schedule, no consistent preferences were demonstrated for response-dependent or response-independent schedules. However, response rates were three times greater on response-dependent than on response-independent schedules. The discrimination between terminal-link schedules was rapidly recovered after the schedule positions were reversed. Casual observations revealed that the birds engaged in stereotypic circling and pecking while the response-independent schedules were operative.     

Molar optimization versus delayed reinforcement as explanations of choice between fixed-ratio and progressive-ratio schedules.

In a discrete-trials procedure, pigeons chose between a fixed-ratio 81 schedule and a progressive-ratio schedule by making a single peck at the key correlated with one or the other of these schedules. The response requirement on the progressive-ratio schedule began at 1 and increased by 10 each time the progressive-ratio schedule was chosen. Each time the fixed-ratio schedule was chosen, the requirement on the progressive-ratio schedule was reset to 1 response. In conditions where there was no intertrial interval, subjects chose the progressive-ratio schedule for an average of about five consecutive trials (during which the response requirement increased to 41), and then chose the fixed-ratio schedule. This ratio was larger than that predicted by an optimality analysis that assumes that subjects respond in a pattern that minimizes the response-reinforcer ratio or one that assumes that subjects respond in a pattern that maximizes the overall rate of reinforcement. In conditions with a 25-s or 50-s intertrial interval, subjects chose the progressive-ratio schedule for an average of about eight consecutive trials before choosing the fixed-ratio schedule. This change in performance with the addition of an intertrial interval was also not predicted by an optimality analysis. On the other hand, the results were consistent with the theory that choice is determined by the delays to the reinforcers delivered on the present trial and on subsequent trials.     

Response persistence under ratio and interval reinforcement schedules

In Experiment 1, rats were exposed to progressive-ratio schedules of food reinforcement while other rats were exposed simultaneously to yoked-interval schedules that arranged equivalent interreinforcer intervals but required only a single response at the end of the interval for food delivery. In Experiment 2, a within-subject yoked-control procedure was employed in which pigeons were exposed to alternating sessions (one per day) of progressive-ratio schedules and yoked-interval schedules as described above. In both experiments, responding under the yoked-interval schedule persisted beyond the point at which responding under the progressive-ratio schedule had ceased. The progressive-ratio schedules controlled break-and-run distributions, and the yoked-interval schedules controlled more even distributions of responses in time. Response rates decreased and postreinforcement pauses increased over time within individual sessions under both schedules. The results suggest that responding maintained by interval schedules is more persistent than that maintained by ratio schedules. The limitations and implications of this conclusion are discussed in the context of other investigations of response strength and behavioral momentum.