Within-session Changes In Responding During Concurrent Variable-interval Schedules

Five rats and 4 pigeons responded for food delivered by several concurrent variable-interval schedules. The sum of the rates of reinforcement programmed for the two components varied from 15 to 480 reinforcers per hour in different conditions. Rates of responding usually changed within the experimental session in a similar manner for the two components of each concurrent schedule. The within-session changes were similar to previously reported changes during simple schedules that provided rates of reinforcement equal to the sum of all reinforcers obtained from the concurrent schedules. The number of changeovers also changed within sessions in a manner similar to the changes in instrumental responding. These results suggest that changeovers are governed by the same variables that govern instrumental responding. They also suggest that the within-session change in responding during each component of a concurrent schedule is determined by approximately the sum of the reinforcers obtained from both components when both components provide the same type of reinforcer.     

Within-session changes in responding during concurrent schedules with different reinforcers in the components.

Rats and pigeons responded on several concurrent schedules that provided different reinforcers in the two components (food and water for rats, Experiment 1; wheat and mixed grain for pigeons, Experiment 2). The rate of responding and the time spent responding on each component usually changed within the session. The within-session changes in response rates and time spent responding usually followed different patterns for the two components of a concurrent schedule. For most subjects, the bias and sensitivity to reinforcement parameters of the generalized matching law, as well as the percentage of the variance accounted for, decreased within the session. Negative sensitivity parameters were sometimes found late in the session for the concurrent food-water schedules. These results imply that within-session changes in responding could cause problems for assessing the validity of quantitative theories of concurrent-schedule responding when the components provide different reinforcers. They question changes in a general motivational state, such as arousal, as a complete explanation for within-session changes in responding. The results are compatible with satiation for, or sensitization-habituation to, the reinforcers as explanations.     

Within-session changes in key and lever pressing for water during several multiple variable-interval schedules

Rats pressed keys or levers for water reinforcers delivered by several multiple variable-interval schedules. The programmed rate of reinforcement varied from 15 to 240 reinforcers per hour in different conditions. Responding usually increased and then decreased within experimental sessions. As for food reinforcers, the within-session changes in both lever and key pressing were smaller, peaked later, and were more symmetrical around the middle of the session for lower than for higher rates of reinforcement. When schedules provided high rates of reinforcement, some quantitative differences appeared in the within-session changes for lever and key pressing and for food and water. These results imply that basically similar factors produce within-session changes in responding for lever and key pressing and for food and water. The nature of the reinforcer and the choice of response can also influence the quantitative properties of within-session changes at high rates of reinforcement. Finally, the results show that the application of Herrnstein's (1970) equation to rates of responding averaged over the session requires careful consideration.     

Behavioral economics and within-session changes in responding

Pigeons and rats responded on fixed-ratio schedules with requirements ranging from 5 to 120 responses. Consistent with past results from several schedules and procedures, responding usually changed systematically within experimental sessions. The within-session changes were usually larger and were less symmetrical around the middle of the session for schedules that provided higher, rather than lower, rates of reinforcement. These results suggest that similar variables contribute to within-session changes in responding under different schedules. When an economic demand function was fit to the data, the intensity and elasticity of demand for food and the percentage of the variance accounted for decreased within sessions, although the trend for elasticity did not reach statistical significance for pigeons. These results suggest that relatively short sessions should be used to study economic demand in open economies and that demand may differ at different times in a session and in sessions of different lengths. Within-session changes in intensity, but not necessarily elasticity, of demand are consistent with behavioral economic theories.     

Within-session Changes In Responding During Autoshaping And Automaintenance Procedures

Four pigeons were exposed to autoshaping procedures in which an 8-second light on a response key was followed by food. Pecks on the key had no scheduled consequences. Subjects were also exposed to negative automaintenance procedures in which a peck on the illuminated key canceled the following food. The intertrial interval varied from an average of 7 seconds to an average of 232 seconds in different conditions. Rate of responding usually changed within sessions during autoshaping. Responding also changed within sessions for the 1 subject that responded during negative automaintenance. The within-session patterns of responding were flatter, peaked later, and were more symmetrical around the middle of the sessions at lower rates of food presentation, regardless of whether subjects responded on autoshaping, negative automaintenance, or previously reported variable-interval schedules. These results imply that similar variables produce within-session changes in responding during both classical (Pavlovian) and operant conditioning procedures.     

Molar And Molecular Control In Variable-interval And Variable-ratio Schedules

Response rates are typically higher under variable-ratio than under variable-interval schedules of reinforcement, perhaps because of differences in the dependence of reinforcement rate on response rate or because of differences in the reinforcement of long interresponse times. A variable-interval-with-added-linear-feedback schedule is a variable-interval schedule that provides a response rate/reinforcement rate correlation by permitting the minimum interfood interval to decrease with rapid responding. Four rats were exposed to variable-ratio 15, 30, and 60 food reinforcement schedules, variable-interval 15-, 30-, and 60-s food reinforcement schedules, and two versions of variable-interval-with-added-linear-feedback 15-, 30-, and 60-s food reinforcement schedules. Response rates on the variable-interval-with-added-linear-feedback schedule were similar to those on the variable-interval schedule; all three schedules led to lower response rates than those on the variable-ratio schedules, especially when the schedule values were 30. Also, reinforced interresponse times on the variable-interval-with-added-linear-feedback schedule were similar to those on variable interval and much longer than those produced by variable ratio. The results were interpreted as supporting the hypothesis that response rates on variable-interval schedules in rats are lower than those on comparable variable-ratio schedules, primarily because the former schedules reinforce long interresponse times.     

Patterns of responding within sessions.

Rates of responding changed systematically across sessions for rats pressing levers and keys and for pigeons pressing treadles and pecking keys. A bitonic function in which response rates increased and then decreased across sessions was the most common finding, although an increase in responding also occurred alone. The change in response rate was usually large. The function relating responding to time in session had the following general characteristics: It appeared early in training, and further experience moved and reduced its peak; it was flatter for longer sessions; and it was flatter, more symmetrical, and peaked later for lower than for higher rates of reinforcement. Factors related to reinforcement exerted more control over the location of the peak rate of responding and the steepness of the decline in response rates than did factors related to responding. These within-session changes in response rates have fundamental theoretical and methodological implications.     

Effects Of Histories Of Differential Reinforcement Of Response Rate On Variable-interval Responding

Three pigeons were exposed first to multiple differential-reinforcement-of-high-rate and differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedules that were correlated with green and red keys, respectively, and then were shifted to a variable-interval schedule arranged on a white key. In subsequent test sessions, the variable-interval schedule continued to operate, but green and red keys replaced the white key in alternate sessions. In Part 1 of the experiment, the variable-interval schedule correlated with the white key was introduced immediately after the multiple-schedule condition, and the test condition began 15 days later. This sequence was repeated twice, with a reversal of the correlation of the key colors with the components of the multiple schedule at the start of each new cycle. Part 2 added a 6-month break between the multiple-schedule history and the white-key variable-interval schedule followed by test sessions. The procedure was then repeated with a reversal of the correlation between key colors and multiple-schedule components. In the test sessions of Part 1, all pigeons consistently responded faster in the presence of the key color most recently correlated with the differential-reinforcement-of-high-rate contingency than during the color most recently correlated with the differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate contingency. Similar but smaller effects were observed in Part 2. The effects of the reversals in these two parts of the experiment showed that only the most recent contingency exerted an influence on subsequent responding. The data suggest that this effect of the most recent history continues to operate on behavior under current contingencies even after a long lapse of time.     

Reward Density And Variable-interval Schedule Performance In An Open Economy

There is no general agreement regarding the form of the relation between response rate and reinforcement rate when single schedules of reinforcement are studied in an open economy. The present study assessed the form of this relation using reward density, which incorporates both reinforcement rate and duration of access to food, as an independent variable. Reward density was manipulated with 4 pigeons by changing the value of the variable-interval schedule, the hopper duration, or both. The relations between response rate and reward density were sharply rising and hyperbolic in 3 of 4 pigeons, replicating results obtained by Catania and Reynolds (1968). Because eating efficiency was lower in conditions that provided longer hopper durations, programmed reward densities differed from obtained reward densities. When response rates were examined as a function of obtained reward densities, the same relations were demonstrated more strongly. In further clarifying the relation between response rate and reward density in an open economy, these results lend support to the conclusion that open and closed economies yield different behavioral effects.     

Optimality And Concurrent Variable-interval Variable-ratio Schedules

Despite claims to the contrary, all leading theories about operant choice may be seen as models of optimality. Although melioration is often contrasted with global maximization, both make the same core assumptions as other versions of optimality theory, including momentary maximizing, hill climbing, and the various versions of optimal foraging theory. The present experiment aimed to test melioration against more global optimality and to apply the visit-by-visit analysis suggested by foraging theory. Rats were exposed to concurrent schedules in which one alternative was always variable-ratio 10 and the other alternative was a variable-interval schedule. Although choice relations varied from rat to rat, the overall results roughly confirmed the matching law, a result often taken to support melioration. Pooling the data across sessions and across rats, however, resulted in no increment in unsystematic variance, lending support to the contention by Ziriax and Silberberg (1984) that the choice relation is partly constrained. When the data were analyzed at the level of visits, the results either disconfirmed predictions of melioration or showed regularities about which melioration is silent. Instead, performance tended toward a rough optimization, in which responding favored the variable ratio, but with relatively brief visits to the variable interval. There were no asymmetries in travel or variability that would indicate that different processes were involved in generating visits at the two different schedules. The findings point toward a more global optimality model than melioration and demonstrate the value of per-visit analysis in the study of concurrent performances.     

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.     

Variable-interval schedules of timeout from avoidance

Rats were trained on concurrent schedules in which pressing one lever postponed shock and pressing the other occasionally produced a 2-min timeout during which the shock-postponement schedule was suspended and its correlated stimuli were removed. Throughout, the shock-postponement schedule maintained proficient levels of avoidance. Nevertheless, in Experiment 1 responding on the timeout lever was established rapidly, was maintained at stable levels on variable-interval schedules, was extinguished by withholding timeout, was reestablished when timeout was reintroduced, and was brought under discriminative control with a multiple variable-interval extinction schedule of timeout. These results are in contrast with Verhave's (1962) conclusion that timeout is an ineffective reinforcer when presented to rats on intermittent schedules. In Experiment 2 the consequence of responding on the timeout lever was altered so that the shock-postponement schedule remained in effect even though the stimulus conditions associated with timeout were produced for 2 min. Responding extinguished, indicating that suspension of the shock-postponement schedule, not stimulus change, was the source of reinforcement. By establishing the reinforcing efficacy of timeout with standard variable-interval schedules, these experiments illustrate a procedure for studying negative reinforcement in the same way as positive reinforcement.     

Effects of alternative reinforcement sources: A reevaluation

The effects of two alternative sources of food delivery on the key-peck responding of pigeons were examined. Pecking was maintained by a variable-interval 3-min schedule. In the presence of this schedule in different conditions, either a variable-time 3-min schedule delivering food independently of responding or an equivalent schedule that required a minimum 2-s pause between a key peck and food delivery (a differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior schedule) was added. The differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior schedule reduced response rates more than did the variable-time schedule in most instances. The delay between a key peck and the next reinforcer consistently was longer under the differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior schedule than under the variable-time schedule. Response rates and median delay between responses and reinforcers were negatively correlated. These results contradict earlier conclusions about the behavioral effects of alternative reinforcement. They suggest that an interpretation in terms of response–reinforcer contiguity is consistent with the data.     

Representing within-session response rates proportionally and entirely.

In this technical article, methods for collecting and representing response rates maintained by schedules of reinforcement are presented. First, the time in a session that each important event (e.g., responses, reinforcers) occurs is collected and stored by a computer. Another computer program is used, then, to convert each response to a percentage of the total responses in a session and to plot these percentages cumulatively as a function of the time in the session that they occurred. In this manner, response rates may be expressed proportionally (i.e., using the same y-axis scale regardless of absolute response rate) without requiring the arbitrary selection of an interval over which responses are aggregated and expressed relative to the entire-session rate. A property of these records is that deviations in the slope of the obtained record from the diagonal, which connects (x, y) = (start of session, 0%) to (x, y) = (end of session, 100%), occurring at any point and for any duration, represent changes in the local response rate from the entire-session rate. This method of representing ongoing responding is illustrated by several records of key pecking of a pigeon on a variable-interval 60-s schedule of food reinforcement. Relative local response rates were also computed from these data at several levels of resolution (i.e., the time over which responses were aggregated), including the level typically employed by those interested in within-session changes in response rates.     

Variable-interval schedule performance in open and closed economies

In two experiments, pigeons obtained food according to variable-interval schedules. In the first experiment, equivalent variable-interval schedules with average interreinforcer intervals ranging between 10 and 80 s in different conditions were studied in both open and closed economies. Response rates increased as reinforcement frequency decreased in the closed economy. By contrast, in the open economy response rates decreased for 1 bird and were variable for the other as reinforcement frequency decreased. The second experiment showed that the differences in the functions between responding and reinforcement frequency in the two types of economies were not due to changes in deprivation level. These results suggest that open and closed economies yield different behavioral effects. This conclusion is supported further by a reconsideration of previous findings that appear counter to the conclusion.     

Paired baseline performance as a behavioral ideal

Several recent theories view performance under the constraints of a schedule as an attempt to approach the basepoint, the total amount of the instrumental response and the total amount of the contingent response seen in the absence of schedule constraint. Some new analyses of experiments on concurrent ratio schedules, and simple ratio schedules offering an optional magnitude of contingent reward, tested this view directly. In each of the five experiments examined the organism rejected the chance of a closer approach to the basepoint, and thereby failed in addition to maximize the rate of reinforcement.     

On the primacy of molecular processes in determining response rates under variable-ratio and variable-interval schedules

This study focused on variables that may account for response-rate differences under variable-ratio (VR) and variable-interval (VI) schedules of reinforcement. Four rats were exposed to VR, VI, tandem VI differential-reinforcement-of-high-rate, regulated-probability-interval, and negative-feedback schedules of reinforcement that provided the same rate of reinforcement. Response rates were higher under the VR schedule than the VI schedule, and the rates on all other schedules approximated those under the VR schedule. The median reinforced interresponse time (IRT) under the VI schedule was longer than for the other schedules. Thus, differences in reinforced IRTs correlated with differences in response rate, an outcome suggestive of the molecular control of response rate. This conclusion was complemented by the additional finding that the differences in molar reinforcement-feedback functions had little discernible impact on responding.     

Tests of transitivity in choices between fixed and variable reinforcer delays.

This experiment tested for transitivity in pigeons' choices between variable-time (VT) and fixed-time (FT) schedules. In a discrete-trials procedure, a subject chose between two alternatives by making a single key peck. Each choice was between a "standard alternative," which was the same schedule throughout a condition, and an "adjusting alternative," in which the delay to reinforcement was systematically increased or decreased many times a session. These adjustments enabled an approximate indifference point to be identified--the value of the adjusting delay at which the subject chose each alternative about equally often. Each test of transitivity involved four conditions. In one, the standard alternative was a variable-time schedule with a 2-s reinforcer, and the adjusting alternative also delivered a 2-s reinforcer. A second condition was similar except that the adjusting alternative delivered a 5-s reinforcer. The indifference point from each of these conditions was then converted to a fixed-time schedule for subsequent comparisons in the third and fourth conditions, respectively. Each of these last two conditions compared one of the fixed-time schedules (based upon the previous conditions and including their different reinforcer durations) with an adjusting schedule that delivered the alternative reinforcer duration, to determine whether the obtained indifference points would be those predicted from the prior alternative-duration comparisons with the VT schedule. There was little evidence for intransitivity of choice: Averaged across subjects and replications, the obtained indifference points deviated from perfect transitivity by less than 8%, and these deviations were not statistically significant. These results contrast with those of Navarick and Fantino (1972), who found frequent violations of transitivity between periodic and aperiodic schedules using a concurrent-chains procedure with variable-interval schedules in the initial links.