Effects Of Fixed-interval Schedule And Reinforcer Duration On Responding Reinforced By The Opportunity To Run

Two experiments investigated the effects of schedule value and reinforcer duration on responding for the opportunity to run on fixed-interval (FI) schedules in rats. In the first experiment, 8 male Wistar rats were exposed to FI 15-s, 30-s, and 60-s schedules of wheel-running reinforcement. The operant was lever pressing, and the consequence was the opportunity to run for 60 s. In the second experiment, 8 male Long-Evans rats were exposed to reinforcer durations of 15 s, 30 s, and 90 s. The schedule of reinforcement was an FI 60-s schedule. Results showed that postreinforcement pause and wheel-running rates varied systematically with reinforcer duration but not schedule value. Local lever-pressing rates decreased with reinforcer duration. Overall lever-pressing rates decreased with reinforcer duration but increased with schedule value. Although the reinforcer-duration effect is consistent with previous research, the lack a schedule effect appears to be the result of long post-reinforcement pauses following wheel-running reinforcement that render the manipulation of the interval requirement ineffective.     

Resistance to change and the law of effect

Three experiments using multiple schedules of reinforcement explored the implications of resistance-to-change findings for the response-reinforcer relation described by the law of effect, using both steady-state responding and responding recorded in the first few sessions of conditions. In Experiment 1, when response-independent reinforcement was increased during a third component, response rate in Components 1 and 2 decreased. This response-rate reduction was proportionately greater in a component in which reinforcer magnitude was small (2-s access to wheat) than in the component in which it was large (6-s access to wheat). However, when reinforcer rates in the two components were varied together in Experiments 2 and 3, response-rate change was the same regardless of the magnitude of reinforcers used in the two components, so that sensitivity of response rates to reinforcer rates (Experiment 2) and of response-rate ratios to reinforcer-rate ratios (Experiment 3) was unaffected by the magnitude of the reinforcers. Therefore, the principles determining resistance to change, described by behavioral momentum theory, seem not to apply when the source of behavior change is the variation of reinforcement contingencies that maintain the behavior. The use of extinction as a manipulation to study resistance to change is questioned.     

Reinforcer magnitude (sucrose concentration) and the matching law theory of response strength

This experiment investigated the relationship between reinforcer magnitude (sucrose concentration) and response rate. The purpose was to evaluate the behavior of two parameters of an equation that predicts absolute response rate as a function of reinforcement rate and two free parameters. According to Herrnstein's (1970) theory of reinforced behavior, one parameter of this "response-strength equation" measures the efficacy of the reinforcer maintaining responding and the other parameter measures motoric components of response rate, such as response duration. Seven rats served as subjects. Experimental sessions consisted of a series of five different variable-interval schedules of reinforcement, each in effect for 5 minutes. Within each session, obtained reinforcement rates varied over more than a 30-fold range, from about 20 per hour to 700 per hour. The reinforcer was sucrose solution, and, between sessions, its concentration was varied from 0.0 to 0.64 molar (0 to 21.9%). For sucrose concentrations of 0.16 to 0.64 m, response rate was a negatively accelerated function of reinforcement rate. Increases in sucrose concentration increased response rates maintained by low but not high reinforcement rates. This pattern of changes corresponds to a change in the reinforcement-efficacy parameter of the response-strength equation. In contrast, the motor-performance parameter did not change as a function of sucrose concentration. These findings are inconsistent with the results of a similar study (Bradshaw, Szabadi, & Bevan, 1978) but support Herrnstein's theory of reinforced behavior.     

Fixed-interval limited-hold avoidance with and without signalled reinforcement

Rats trained to lever press on a fixed-interval limited-hold avoidance schedule maintained a pattern of responding similar to that maintained by fixed-interval limited-hold schedules of positive reinforcement. But this positively accelerated pattern of behavior was maintained only when the occurrence of reinforcement was signalled by the presentation of a brief flash of light. This result suggests that the discriminative function of the reinforcer in avoidance is less pronounced than the discriminative function of the reinforcer in escape or positive reinforcement. It also suggests that the distinction between positive reinforcement and avoidance is not superfluous. Although the schedule of reinforcement is an important variable in determining the pattern of behavior, other variables, such as the nature (i.e., stimulus presentation, termination, or omission) of the reinforcer, are also potent determinants of behavior.     

Concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules can provide only weak evidence for matching

Herrnstein and Heyman (1979) showed that when pigeons' pecking is reinforced on concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules, (1) their behavior ratios match the ratio of the schedules' reinforcer frequencies, and (2) there is more responding on the variable interval. Since maximizing the reinforcement rate would require responding more on the variable ratio, these results were presented as establishing the primacy of matching over maximizing. In the present report, different ratios of behavior were simulated on a computer to see how they would affect reinforcement rates on these concurrent schedules. Over a wide range of experimenter-specified choice ratios, matching obtained — a result suggesting that changes in choice allocation produced changes in reinforcer frequencies that correspond to the matching outcome. Matching also occurred at arbitrarily selected choice ratios when reinforcement rates were algebraically determined by each schedule's reinforcement-feedback function. Additionally, three birds were exposed to concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules contingent on key pecking in which hopper durations were varied in some conditions to produce experimenter-specified choice ratios. Matching generally obtained between choice ratios and reinforcer-frequency ratios at these different choice ratios. By suggesting that reinforcer frequencies track choice on this procedure, instead of vice versa, this outcome questions whether matching-as-outcome was due to matching-as-process in the Herrnstein and Heyman study.     

The effects of component duration on multiple-schedule performance in closed and open economies.

Pigeons responded on multiple variable-interval variable-interval schedules of reinforcement in an open and a closed economy. Equal duration components were increased in duration while the component rates of reinforcement were held constant, the component schedules were reversed, and component duration was decreased. In the open economy, daily sessions were limited to 1 hr, and subjects were maintained at 80% of their free-feeding weights through supplemental feeding when necessary in their home cages. In the closed economy, subjects were housed in their experimental chambers and no deprivation regimen was enforced. Relative response rate decreased as components were lengthened in the open economy, whereas in the closed economy relative rate increased as components were lengthened. Response proportions overmatched reinforcer proportions to a greater extent at long component durations in the closed economy, but there was no systematic effect of component duration on responding in the open economy.     

Concurrent reinforcement schedules for problem behavior and appropriate behavior: experimental applications of the matching law

This study evaluated how children who exhibited functionally equivalent problem and appropriate behavior allocate responding to experimentally arranged reinforcer rates. Relative reinforcer rates were arranged on concurrent variable-interval schedules and effects on relative response rates were interpreted using the generalized matching equation. Results showed that relative rates of responding approximated relative rates of reinforcement. Finally, interventions for problem behavior were evaluated and differential reinforcement of alternative behavior and extinction procedures were implemented to increase appropriate behavior and decrease problem behavior. Practical considerations for the application of the generalized matching equation specific to severe problem behavior are discussed, including difficulties associated with defining a reinforced response, and obtaining steady state responding in clinical settings.     

Running and responding reinforced by the opportunity to run: effect of reinforcer duration.

The present study investigated the effect of reinforcer duration on running and on responding reinforced by the opportunity to run. Eleven male Wistar rats responded on levers for the opportunity to run in a running wheel. Opportunities to run were programmed to occur on a tandem fixed-ratio 1 variable-interval 30-s reinforcement schedule. Reinforcer duration varied across conditions from 30 to 120 s. As reinforcer duration increased, the rates of running and lever pressing declined, and latency to lever press increased. The increase in latency to respond was consistent with findings that unconditioned inhibitory aftereffects of reinforcement increase with reinforcer magnitude. The decrease in local lever-pressing rates, however, was inconsistent with the view that response strength increases with the duration of the reinforcer. Response rate varied inversely, not directly, with reinforcer duration. Furthermore, within-session data challenge satiation, fatigue, and response deprivation as determinants of the observed changes in running and responding. In sum, the results point to the need for further research with nonappetitive forms of reinforcement.     

All Behavior is choice: Revisiting an evolutionary theory's account of behavior on single schedules

The axiomatic principle that all behavior is choice was incorporated into a revised implementation of an evolutionary theory's account of behavior on single schedules. According to this implementation, target responding occurs in the context of background responding and reinforcement. In Phase 1 of the research, the target responding of artificial organisms (AOs) animated by the revised theory was found to be well described by an exponentiated hyperbola, the parameters of which varied as a function of the background reinforcement rate. In Phase 2, the effect of reinforcer magnitude on the target behavior of the AOs was studied. As in Phase 1, the AOs' behavior was well described by an exponentiated hyperbola, the parameters of which varied with both the target reinforcer magnitude and the background reinforcement rate. Evidence from experiments with live organisms was found to be consistent with the Phase-1 predictions of the revised theory. The Phase-2 predictions have not been tested. The revised implementation of the theory can be used to study the effects of superimposing punishment on single-schedule responding, and it may lead to the discovery of a function that relates response rate to both the rate and magnitude of reinforcement on single schedules.     

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.     

Reinforcement contingencies maintaining collateral responding under a DRL schedule

Two-key conjunctive schedules were studied with one key (food key) under a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 20-sec schedule, while the consequences of responding on another key (collateral key) were varied. When food depended not only upon a food-key interresponse time in excess of 20 sec, but also upon the occurrence of one or more collateral-key responses during the food-key interresponse time, the rate of collateral-key responding was low and food-key interresponse times rarely exceeded 20 sec. When collateral-key responses could produce a discriminative stimulus correlated with the availability of food under the DRL schedule, the discriminative stimulus functioned as a conditioned reinforcer to maintain higher rates of collateral-key responding, and the spacing of food-key responses increased. If the occurrence of the discriminative stimulus was independent of collateral-key responses, the rate of collateral-key responding was again low, but the spacing of food-key responses was still controlled by the discriminative stimulus. Both the conditioned reinforcer and the explicit reinforcement contingency could maintain collateral-key responding, but the adventitious correlation between collateral-key responses and the delivery of food could not maintain very much collateral-key responding. The pattern of responding on the food-key was determined to a much greater extent by the correlation between the discriminative stimulus and the delivery of food than by the pattern of responding on the collateral key.     

Effects of reinforcer duration on responding in two-link chained interval schedules

Each of five pigeons was exposed to two or more durations of access to mixed grains on two-link, chained, interval schedules in which both links were identical fixed-interval or variable-interval schedules. Response rates were an increasing function of reinforcer duration for both initial and terminal links. For both types of interval schedules, initial-link response rates were more sensitive to reinforcer duration than were terminal-link response rates. The present results, together with prior ones, suggest that chaining and choice procedures are each sufficient for demonstrating substantial sensitivity of responding to changes in reinforcer duration.     

Variable-time reinforcement schedules in the treatment of socially maintained problem behavior

Noncontingent reinforcement (NCR) consists of delivering a reinforcer on a time-based schedule, independent of responding. Studies evaluating the effectiveness of NCR as treatment for problem behavior have used fixed-time (FT) schedules of reinforcement. In this study, the efficacy of NCR with variable-time (VT) schedules was evaluated by comparing the effects of VT and FT reinforcement schedules with 2 individuals who engaged in problem behavior maintained by positive reinforcement. Both FT and VT schedules were effective in reducing problem behavior. These findings suggest that VT schedules can be used to treat problem behavior maintained by social consequences.     

Reinforcement magnitude and pausing on progressive-ratio schedules

Rats responded under progressive-ratio schedules for sweetened milk reinforcers; each session ended when responding ceased for 10 min. Experiment 1 varied the concentration of milk and the duration of postreinforcement timeouts. Postreinforcement pausing increased as a positively accelerated function of the size of the ratio, and the rate of increase was reduced as a function of concentration and by timeouts of 10 s or longer. Experiment 2 varied reinforcement magnitude within sessions (number of dipper operations per reinforcer) in conjunction with stimuli correlated with the upcoming magnitude. In the absence of discriminative stimuli, pausing was longer following a large reinforcer than following a small one. Pauses were reduced by a stimulus signaling a large upcoming reinforcer, particularly at the highest ratios, and the animals tended to quit responding when the past reinforcer was large and the stimulus signaled that the next one would be small. Results of both experiments revealed parallels between responding under progressive-ratio schedules and other schedules containing ratio contingencies. Relationships between pausing and magnitude suggest that ratio pausing is under the joint control of inhibitory properties of the past reinforcer and excitatory properties of stimuli correlated with the upcoming reinforcer, rather than under the exclusive control of either factor alone.     

Effects of reinforcement rate and reinforcer magnitude on choice behavior of humans

Two experiments with human subjects investigated the effects of rate of reinforcement and reinforcer magnitude upon choice. In Experiment 1, each of five subjects responded on four concurrent variable-interval schedules. In contrast to previous studies using non-human organisms, relative response rate did not closely match relative rate of reinforcement. Discrepancies ranged from 0.03 to 0.43 (mean equal to 0.19). Similar discrepancies were found between relative amount of time spent responding on each schedule and the corresponding relative rates of reinforcement. In Experiment 2, in which reinforcer magnitude was varied for each of five subjects, similar discrepancies ranging from 0.05 to 0.50 (mean equal to 0.21), were found between relative response rate and relative proportion of reinforcers received. In both experiments, changeover rates were lower on the long-interval concurrent schedules than on the short-interval ones. The results suggest that simple application of previous generalizations regarding the effects of reinforcement rate and reinforcer magnitude on choice for variable-interval schedules does not accurately describe human behavior in a simple laboratory situation.     

Fixed-time schedule effects as a function of baseline reinforcement rate

Using an arbitrary response, we evaluated fixed-time (FT) schedules that were either similar or dissimilar to a baseline (response-dependent) reinforcement schedule and extinction. Results suggested that both FT schedules and extinction resulted in decreased responding. However, FT schedules were more effective in reducing response rates if the FT reinforcer rate was dissimilar to baseline reinforcer rates. Possible reasons for this difference were evaluated with data analysis methods designed to identify adventitious response-reinforcer relations.     

Within-session changes in responding during several simple schedules

Pigeons' key pecking was reinforced by food delivered by several fixed-interval, variable-ratio, and differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedules. Rate of responding, number of responses per reinforcer, length of postreinforcement pause, running response rate, and the time required to collect an available reinforcer changed systematically within sessions when the schedules provided high rates of reinforcement, but usually not when they provided low rates. These results suggest that the factors that produce within-session changes in responding are generally similar for different schedules of reinforcement. However, a separate factor may also contribute during variable-ratio schedules. The results question explanations for within-session changes that are related solely to the passage of time, to responding, and to one interpretation of attention. They support the idea that one or more factors related to reinforcement play a role.     

Greater reinforcement rate during training increases spontaneous recovery

Spontaneous recovery occurs when a previously reinforced and recently extinguished response reemerges over the course of time, often at the beginning of a new session of extinction. Spontaneous recovery could underlie instances of treatment relapse that threaten otherwise effective behavioral interventions for problem behavior. In two experiments, we arranged multiple schedules with pigeons and a human child to assess the effects of different training reinforcer rates on spontaneous recovery. In both experiments, responding was both more resistant to extinction and more likely to relapse following training with greater reinforcement rates upon returning to extinction after time off from extinction testing. A quantitative model based on behavioral momentum theory accounted well for the data, which suggests reexposure to the extinction context following time off during extinction resulted in (1) the failure of extinction learning to generalize, and (2) greater generalization of original learning during training. The present model attempts to quantify theories attributing spontaneous recovery to changes in temporal context.     

Temporal constraint on choice: Sensitivity and bias in multiple schedules

In multiple schedules of reinforcement, ratios of responses in successive components are relatively insensitive to ratios of obtained reinforcers. An analysis is proposed that attributes changes in absolute response rates to concurrent interactions between programmed reinforcement and extraneous reinforcement in other components. The analysis predicts that ratios of responses in successive components vary with reinforcer ratios, qualified by a term describing the reinforcement context, that is, programmed and extraneous reinforcers. Two main predictions from the analysis were confirmed in an experiment in which pigeons' responses were reinforced in the components of a multiple schedule and analog extraneous reinforcement was scheduled for an alternative response in each component. Sensitivity of response and time ratios to reinforcer ratios in the multiple schedules varied as a function of the rate of extraneous reinforcers. Bias towards responding in one component of the multiple schedule varied as an inverse function of the ratios of extraneous reinforcer rate in the two components. The data from this and previous studies of multiple-concurrent performance were accurately predicted by our analysis and supported our contention that the allocation of behavior in multiple-schedule components depends on the relative values of concurrently-available reinforcers within each component.     

Response rate as a function of amount of reinforcement for a signalled concurrent response

Pigeons were exposed to two equal, concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement on two response keys. One key was continuously illuminated. Pecking on that key produced reinforcements of constant duration. The other key was normally dark, except that availability of reinforcement was signalled by illuminating the key. The duration of access to a grain reinforcer was varied on the key that signalled reinforcement. Rate of response on the first key, the one that did not signal reinforcement, was found to vary inversely with duration of signalled reinforcement on the other key. The latency between the signal and the peck that produced signalled reinforcement remained about constant. These results show that responding on one key in concurrent variable-interval schedules depends on the reinforcement delivered by both schedules and is independent of responding on the other key.