Negative behavioral contrast on multiple treadle-press schedules

Eight pigeons pressed treadles for food reinforcers delivered by several multiple variable-interval schedules. The rate of reinforcement for responding during one component schedule was held constant at 30 reinforcers per hour. The rate of reinforcement for responding during the other component varied from 0 to 120 or 240 reinforcers per hour. The schedules were presented in different orders for different subjects. The rate of responding emitted during the variable component schedule varied directly with the rate of reinforcement it provided. The rate of responding during the constant component did not increase consistently when the rate of reinforcement obtained from the variable component decreased from 30 to 0 reinforcers per hr. The rate of responding emitted during the constant component decreased when the rate of reinforcement obtained from the variable component increased from 30 reinforcers per hour to a higher rate. That is, negative but not positive behavioral contrast occurred. The failure to find positive contrast is consistent with one of the predictions of the additive theories of behavioral contrast. Finding negative contrast has ambiguous implications for the additive theories.     

Positive and negative contrast as a function of component duration for key pecking and treadle pressing

Pigeons responded on several multiple schedules for food reinforcers. The duration of the components varied from four seconds to 16 minutes. The absolute size of positive (Experiment 1) and negative (Experiment 2) behavioral contrast varied inversely with component duration when key pecks produced the reinforcers. The absolute size of negative contrast varied directly with component duration, when treadle presses produced the reinforcers (Experiment 3). These results conform to theories that suggest that positive and negative contrast are symmetrical when pigeons peck keys. They also conform to theories that suggest that the same principles do not govern contrast when pigeons peck keys as when they press treadles. Finally, the results support the measurement of behavioral contrast by the differences between baseline rates of responding and the rates emitted when contrast is present.     

Positive behavioral contrast across food and alcohol reinforcers.

The present study examined behavioral contrast during concurrent and multiple schedules that provided food and alcohol reinforcers. Concurrent-schedule contrast occurred in the responding reinforced by food when alcohol reinforcers were removed. It also occurred in the responding reinforced by alcohol when food was removed. Multiple-schedule contrast appeared for food when alcohol reinforcers were removed, but not for alcohol when food was removed. These results show that behavioral contrast may, but does not always, occur across qualitatively different reinforcers. They also show that multiple-schedule contrast may be more difficult to produce than concurrent-schedule contrast. The results have implications for a model of alcohol consumption.     

Positive behavioral contrast in 3-month-old infants on multiple conjugate reinforcement schedules.

Positive behavioral contrast was assessed in two experiments with young infants using multiple conjugate reinforcement schedules. Reinforcement was produced by footkicks which activated the objects of an overhead crib mobile in a manner proportional to the vigor and rate of responding. Distinctive color/pattern cues on the sides of the objects served as discriminative stimuli for components of the multiple schedule. In Experiment 1, infants were trained with one cue (S+) only before insertion of S+ into a multiple schedule with an extinction component. A control group received S+ throughout all sessions. In Experiment 2, a multiple schedule was introduced at the outset, and responses in both components were reinforced before the introduction of extinction in the second component. In a final phase, reinforcement was reintroduced into the second component. Positive behavioral contrast occurred in both experiments. Response reduction in the extinction component was seen only in individual relative response curves. In both experiments, negative emotional behaviors accompanied the extinction component, and in Experiment 1, cooing accompanied presentations of S+.     

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.     

Three versions of the additive theories of behavioral contrast

The additive theories of behavioral contrast state that contrast will occur only when two types of responses interact during multiple schedules. Three more specific versions of the theories may be defined according to how they distinguish these two types of responses. A strong version physically distinguishes them. A second version distinguishes them according to the theoretical processes which control them. A weak version distinguishes them on the basis of the environmental relations which control them. Only the weak version of the theories is currently testable. The weak theory should be tested by establishing each of the two environmental relations independently and then combining them to assess their effect on behavior. Because this test is not usually performed, many of the results which have been taken to support or contradict the additive theories are actually ambiguous.     

A re-examination of local contrast in multiple schedules

Pigeons were presented with multiple schedules of alternating 90-sec components. When components in which grain was never presented alternated with components in which grain was presented on a variable-interval schedule, the average rate of responding in the variable-interval components increased, showing overall positive behavioral contrast. Unlike previous reports, this study found that the response rates for all birds increased toward the end of the variable-interval components as training proceeded. This increase in local response rate disappeared when the multiple schedule was composed solely of variable-interval components and reappeared when the variable-interval components were again alternated with extinction. This finding cannot be predicted or explained by recent theories of behavioral contrast based on autoshaping, and thus questions their sufficiency. We suggest that this local response-rate increase results from the predictable change from high to low density of reinforcement at the end of the fixed-duration component. Thus, the present effect apparently illustrates a different type of interaction between components of a multiple schedule than that described by previous theories of contrast. In a given procedure, either or both types of interaction may occur; neither provides a complete account of behavioral contrast.     

Defining behavioral contrast for multiple schedules

Two different definitions of behavioral contrast have been used for multiple schedules. One, interschedule, definition identifies contrast as changes in the rates of responding which occur when subjects move from one multiple schedule to another. The other, intraschedule, definition emphasizes changes in the rates of responding which occur relative to a baseline rate of responding. The baseline is the rate of responding emitted during a multiple schedule that supplies equal rates of reinforcement in the two components. The distinction between these two definitions is important for empirical and theoretical reasons. For example, theoretical confusion has arisen when the interschedule definition has been used to test and reject theories which implicitly define contrast by the intraschedule definition.     

Undermatching and contrast within components of multiple schedules

Six multiple variable-interval schedules each comprised one variable-interval sixty second component and an alternated component which was varied. Four pigeons' responses were recorded in five successive subintervals of each component. Response rate changes across subintervals revealed instances of local contrast and small local induction effects in the changed component. In the constant component, smaller local contrast and larger local induction effects obtained. Accordingly, the magnitude of behavioral contrast, defined as an inverse relation between response rate in the constant component and reinforcement rate in the changed component, did not change reliably across subintervals of the constant component. Ratios of response rates in initial subintervals were highly sensitive to reinforcement ratios. Sensitivity decreased sharply over the first two-fifths of the components and remained constant for the remainder. The results demonstrated that changes in multiple schedule sensitivity are a function of time since the alternation of successive components.     

Contrast and undermatching as a function of reinforcer duration and quality during multiple schedules

Eight pigeons pecked keys under multiple variable-interval two-minute variable-interval two-minute schedules. In Experiment 1, the reinforcers were 2, 4, or 8 seconds access to a food magazine. In Experiments 2 and 3, the reinforcers were grains that had been determined to be most-, moderately-, or non-preferred. Both positive and negative behavioral contrast occurred when the reinforcers in one component were held constant and the duration or type of reinforcer obtained in the other component varied. Undermatching occurred when the relative rate of responding during a component was plotted as a function of the relative duration of the reinforcers in that component.     

Positive conditioned suppression: an explanation in terms of multiple and concurrent schedules

Rats performed under a baseline variable-interval schedule of food presentation. A response-independent food schedule was then superimposed on the baseline schedule for different periods of time across different conditions. The response-independent schedule operated for the whole session in some conditions, intermittently for sixty second periods in some, and intermittently for ten-second periods in others. Under these latter two sets of conditions, the response-independent food schedule was stimulus correlated and alternated with the baseline schedule according to a multiple schedule. Response-independent food presentations always suppressed responding. The degree of suppression tended to increase the longer the period of response-independent food. Control conditions, in which the superimposed schedule was response-dependent, rather than response-independent, did not produce response suppression. The results fit an analysis of positive conditioned suppression phenomena in the context of multiple and concurrent schedule effects.     

Effects consistent with behavioral contrast during a multiple schedule for discrimination training on mands for attention

This study used a multiple schedule to assess the effects of an S+ or S- in the absence of rules on excessive mand rates with three school-aged children with disabilities and assessed possible contrast effects occurring in conjunction with the intervention. Each of the three participants was exposed to the presence or absence of an S- (black baseball cap). When it was worn, mand approach rates decreased for all three participants; conversely, mand rates increased to twice the baseline rates when the experimenter was not wearing the black baseball cap. Generalization probes conducted for one of the three caregivers showed similar changes when the caregiver wore the cap. Results suggest that effects consistent with positive behavioral contrast occurred with all participants.     

Behavioral contrast for key pecking as a function of component duration when only one component varies

Pigeons pecked keys for food reinforcers delivered by multiple variable-interval 2-min variable-interval 2-min schedules. Positive behavioral contrast was created by changing one component to extinction; negative contrast was achieved by changing one component to a variable-interval 15-s schedule. The duration of each component was varied independently of the other from 5 to 960 s. The size of positive contrast was greatest when the extinction component was 30 or 60 s long. It did not change significantly with changes in the duration of the variable-interval 2-min component. The absolute size of negative contrast decreased with increases in the duration of the variable-interval 2-min component. It did not change significantly with changes in the duration of the variable-interval 15-s component. These results show that the size of contrast is determined primarily by the duration of the component that provides the less favorable conditions of reinforcement. These results are not predicted by current theories.     

An investigation of peak shift and behavioral contrast for autoshaped and operant behavior.

Instrumental treadle press and nonreinforced key peck responses were monitored during discrimination training and generalization testing in pigeons on positive and negative reinforcement schedules. In Experiment 1, six pigeons pressed a treadle for food on a multiple variable-interval extinction schedule. In Experiment 2, three pigeons pressed a treadle to avoid shock on a multiple free-operant avoidance extinction schedule. Different color keylights signaled S+ and S- components. Some positive behavioral contrast occurred during discrimination training, but the effect was small. Pecking occurred to the S+ keylight in Experiment 1 but not in Experiment 2. On stimulus generalization tests, all subjects displayed a positive peak shift when pressing the treadle for food or to avoid shock. However, peak shift was not found for nonreinforced "autopecks" on the stimulus key, although an area shift was observed in Experiment 1. This is the first demonstration of peak shift for pigeons pressing treadles and the only reliable demonstration of peak shift when negative reinforcement maintained responding. These results, in combination with previous demonstrations of peak shift for rats pressing levers and pigeons pecking keys, indicate that peak shift is a general by-product of operant discrimination learning, since it occurs across a variety of the organisms, responses, and reinforcers.     

Stimulus-specific contrast effects during operant discrimination learning

In two experiments, pigeons' responding was equally reinforced in the presence of four line-orientation stimuli. Responding was then reinforced when only two of the four orientation stimuli were present; the remaining two orientations appeared during extinction. Response rates were often highest in the stimulus adjacent to the orientations presented during extinction and often lowest in that orientation adjacent to the orientations presented with reinforcement. These effects were stronger and more persistent when the stimuli were separated by a smaller angle, rendering the discrimination more difficult. These and other data suggest that discrimination training may not be accurately explained in terms of the simple effects of reinforcement and nonreinforcement associated with isolated stimuli, nor by accounts that depend upon stimulus generalization. Recent accounts of contrast that depend upon “emotionality” produced by nonreinforced responding or upon reinforcement-elicited responses are also difficult to apply to these data.     

Absence of anticipatory contrast in rats trained on multiple schedules.

Rats were trained on three- and four-component multiple schedules in which two of the components were correlated with identical reinforcement schedules that remained unchanged throughout training. These target components differed in terms of whether their respective following schedules were either higher or lower in value. Unlike corresponding experiments previously reported with pigeons, higher response rates occurred in the target component followed by a higher valued schedule than in the target component followed by the lower valued schedule. Overall contrast effects occurred independently of these sequential effects, but were inconsistent across subjects. The results suggest that the effects of a following schedule of reinforcement are opposite for pigeons and rats, and that one reason previous studies have often failed to show contrast effects with rats is that the effects of the following schedule in rats are in competition with contrast dynamics.     

Choice performance in several concurrent key-peck treadle-press reinforcement schedules

Five pigeons were exposed to several concurrent variable-interval food reinforcement schedules. For three subjects, one component of the schedule required a key-pecking response, the other a treadle-pressing response. For the other two subjects, both schedule components required treadle-pressing responses. The relative probability of reinforcement associated with the manipulanda was varied from 0 to 1.0 in 13 experimental conditions for the Key-Treadle subjects and nine conditions for the Treadle-Treadle subjects. The results indicated that the logarithms of relative time spent responding, and the logarithms of relative number of responses emitted on a manipulandum, approximated direct linear functions of logarithms of the relative frequencies of reinforcement associated with that manipulandum. No systematic bias in favor of time spent key pecking over time spent treadle pressing was apparent for the Key-Treadle subjects. All subjects exhibited undermatching, in that the ratios of time and response allocation at the alternatives systematically differed from the ratios of reinforcers obtained from the alternatives in the direction of indifference. Key pecking appeared to have no special link to food beyond treadle pressing or what would be expected on the basis of the reinforcement dependencies alone.     

Behavioral contrast and the automaintained key peck

In two experiments behavioral contrast was demonstrated during discrimination training in a positive automaintenance procedure. During the baseline condition in each experiment, a key was transilluminated for eight seconds by one of two colors (CS) following a variable intertrial interval signaled by a dark key. Keylight transillumination terminated with a response-independent food presentation. In the first experiment, food was eliminated during one CS for up to fifty sessions. After reinstatement of food following each CS, the discrimination was reversed. Six of the eight subjects showed positive behavioral contrast, i.e., response rates increased during the CS associated with food as they decreased during the CS associated with no food. The effect was replicated in Experiment II, but it did not occur when both the food and its associated CS were eliminated. These results were comparable to those obtained with operant discrimination training procedures (behavioral contrast) and with Pavlovian discrimination training. The results suggest that additivity theories of behavioral contrast may be insufficient to account for these data.     

Signalled reinforcement and multiple schedules

The responses of four pigeons were first reinforced in the presence of two different wave-lengths (green and red) on a two-ply multiple schedule with identical variable-interval 3-min schedules of reinforcement associated with each component. While the constant-component reinforcement schedule remained unchanged during the experiment, the schedule associated with the variable component was changed to (1) signalled variable time, (2) unsignalled variable time, or (3) signalled variable interval. The probability with which the availability of the reinforcer was signalled in the variable-interval schedules was either 0.5 or 1.0. Positive contrast occurred in both signalled variable-interval and variable-time schedules, but only when the availability of all the variable-component reinforcers was signalled. Signalling the availability of only 50% of the reinforcers in signalled variable-interval schedules resulted in negative induction. The present data suggest that positive behavioral contrast resulting from signalled reinforcer availability is due to the presence of an extinction-correlated stimulus.     

Stimulus-reinforcer contingencies and local behavioral contrast

Four pigeons were exposed to a series of multiple schedules of variable-interval reinforcement in which pecks were required on one key (operant key) and components were signalled on a second key (signal key). Four additional pigeons experienced identical conditions, except that a yoking procedure delivered food on variable-time schedules, with no key pecks required. One of the components of the multiple schedule was constant throughout the experiment as a variable-interval (or variable-time) 30-second schedule. Operant-key responding during the constant component was uniform throughout the component, uninfluenced by changes in the duration of the variable component, and only slightly influenced by changes in reinforcement frequency correlated with the variable component. By comparison, signal-key response rate during the constant component was highest at the onset of the component, was higher when the variable component was 60-sec long than when it was 1-sec long, and was higher when no reinforcement occurred in the variable component than when reinforcement was scheduled in the variable component. These characteristics of signal-key pecking matched characteristics of local positive behavioral contrast. These data are taken to support the “additivity theory” of behavioral contrast and to suggest that Pavlovian stimulus-reinforcer relations contribute primarily to the phenomenon of local positive contrast.