Self-schematic representation of the type A and B behavior patterns

Past research has established clear behavioral differences between Type A and B individuals. The purpose of our research was to examine how these behavioral differences are represented in the self-definitions of Type As and Bs. We investigated the existence of Type A and B self-schemata by using two tasks designed to measure the influence of these hypothetical structures on speed of processing and memory interference. During an initial task, Type As and Bs made self-relevant decisions (like me, not like me) in response to trait adjectives previously scaled as Type A, Type B, or neutral in content. Reaction times for the decisions were measured, and results indicated that both Type As and Bs made faster decisions for schema-compatible responses than for schema-incompatible responses. On a second task, Type As and Bs were tested for recognition memory after they attempted to memorize half of the aforementioned trait list. Memory errors were examined and indicated that Type As and Bs made more errors that were compatible with their respective self-schemata. Taken together, these results indicate that a Type A and B distinction forms a reliable organizing framework for the self-definitions of Type As and Bs. The existence of stable cognitive structures that parallel the behavioral differences between Type As and Bs has important implications for both theory and application.     

Concurrent-schedule performance in transition: changeover delays and signaled reinforcer ratios

Six pigeons were trained in experimental sessions that arranged six or seven components with various concurrent-schedule reinforcer ratios associated with each. The order of the components was determined randomly without replacement. Components lasted until the pigeons had received 10 reinforcers, and were separated by 10-s blackout periods. The component reinforcer ratios arranged in most conditions were 27:1, 9:1, 3:1, 1:1, 1:3, 1:9 and 1:27; in others, there were only six components, three of 27:1 and three of 1:27. In some conditions, each reinforcement ratio was signaled by a different red-yellow flash frequency, with the frequency perfectly correlated with the reinforcer ratio. Additionally, a changeover delay was arranged in some conditions, and no changeover delay in others. When component reinforcer ratios were signaled, sensitivity to reinforcement values increased from around 0.40 before the first reinforcer in a component to around 0.80 before the 10th reinforcer. When reinforcer ratios were not signaled, sensitivities typically increased from zero to around 0.40. Sensitivity to reinforcement was around 0.20 lower in no-changeover-delay conditions than in changeover-delay conditions, but increased in the former after exposure to changeover delays. Local analyses showed that preference was extreme towards the reinforced alternative for the first 25 s after reinforcement in changeover-delay conditions regardless of whether components were signaled or not. In no-changeover-delay conditions, preference following reinforcers was either absent, or, following exposure to changeover delays, small. Reinforcers have both local and long-term effects on preference. The former, but not the latter, is strongly affected by the presence of a changeover delay. Stimulus control may be more closely associated with longer-term, more molar, reinforcer effects.     

Every reinforcer counts: reinforcer magnitude and local preference

Six pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval schedules. Sessions consisted of seven components, each lasting 10 reinforcers, with the conditions of reinforcement differing between components. The component sequence was randomly selected without replacement. In Experiment 1, the concurrent-schedule reinforcer ratios in components were all equal to 1.0, but across components reinforcer-magnitude ratios varied from 1:7 through 7:1. Three different overall reinforcer rates were arranged across conditions. In Experiment 2, the reinforcer-rate ratios varied across components from 27:1 to 1:27, and the reinforcer-magnitude ratios for each alternative were changed across conditions from 1:7 to 7:1. The results of Experiment 1 replicated the results for changing reinforcer-rate ratios across components reported by Davison and Baum (2000, 2002): Sensitivity to reinforcer-magnitude ratios increased with increasing numbers of reinforcers in components. Sensitivity to magnitude ratio, however, fell short of sensitivity to reinforcer-rate ratio. The degree of carryover from component to component depended on the reinforcer rate. Larger reinforcers produced larger and longer postreinforcer preference pulses than did smaller reinforcers. Similar results were found in Experiment 2, except that sensitivity to reinforcer magnitude was considerably higher and was greater for magnitudes that differed more from one another. Visit durations following reinforcers measured either as number of responses emitted or time spent responding before a changeover were longer following larger than following smaller reinforcers, and were longer following sequences of same reinforcers than following other sequences. The results add to the growing body of research that informs model building at local levels.     

Leaving patches: effects of economy, deprivation, and session duration

Three pigeons pecked keys for food reinforcers in a laboratory analogue of foraging in patches. Half the patches contained food (were prey patches). In prey patches, pecks to one key occasionally produced a reinforcer, followed by a fixed travel time and then the start of a new patch. Pecks to another key were exit responses, and immediately produced travel time and then a new patch. Travel time was varied from 0.25 to 16 s at each of three session durations: 1, 4, and 23.5 hr. This part of the experiment arranged a closed economy, in that the only source of food was reinforcers obtained in prey patches. In another part, food deprivation was manipulated by varying postsession feeding so as to maintain the subjects' body weights at percentages ranging from 85% to 95% of their ad lib weights, in 1-hr sessions with a travel time of 12 s. This was an open economy. Patch residence time, defined as the time between the start of a patch and an exit response, increased with increasing travel time, and consistently exceeded times predicted by an optimal foraging model, supporting previously published results. However, residence times also increased with increasing session duration and, in longer sessions, consistently exceeded previously reported residence times in comparable open-economy conditions. Residence times were not systematically affected by deprivation levels. In sum, the results show that the long residence times obtained in long closed-economy sessions should probably be attributed to session duration rather than to economy or deprivation. This conclusion is hard to reconcile with previous interpretations of longer-than-optimal residence times but is consistent with, in economic terms, a predicted shift in consumption towards a preferred commodity when income is increased.     

Reporting contingencies of reinforcement in concurrent schedules

Five pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval schedules in which two intensities of yellow light served as discriminative stimuli in a switching-key procedure. A conditional discrimination involving a simultaneous choice between red and green keys followed every reinforcer obtained from both alternatives. A response to the red side key was occasionally reinforced if the prior reinforcer had been obtained from the bright alternative, and a response to the green side key was occasionally reinforced if the prior reinforcer had been obtained from the dim alternative. Measures of the discriminability between the concurrent-schedule alternatives were obtained by varying the reinforcer ratio for correct red and correct green responses across conditions in two parts. Part 1 arranged equal rates of reinforcement in the concurrent schedule, and Part 2 provided a 9:1 concurrent-schedule reinforcer ratio. Part 3 arranged a 1:9 reinforcer ratio in the conditional discrimination, and the concurrent-schedule reinforcer ratio was varied across conditions. Varying the conditional discrimination reinforcer ratio did not affect response allocation in the concurrent schedule, but varying the concurrent-schedule reinforcer ratio did affect conditional discrimination performance. These effects were incompatible with a contingency-discriminability model of concurrent-schedule performance (Davison & Jenkins, 1985), which implies a constant discriminability parameter that is independent of the obtained reinforcer ratio. However, a more detailed analysis of conditional discrimination performance showed that the discriminability between the concurrent-schedule alternatives decreased with time since changing over to an alternative. This effect, combined with aspects of the temporal distribution of reinforcers obtained in the concurrent schedules, qualitatively predicted the molar results and identified the conditions that operate whenever contingency discriminability remains constant.     

Histological data: Hollard and Davison (1971)

As Mogenson and Cioé (1977) have assumed that our electrodes aimed at the ectostriatum (Hollard and Davison, 1971) were actually located there, we feel that a presentation of the histological data is necessary. Following termination of further experiments (Hollard, 1974) the pigeons, numbered 93, 95, and 119, were sacrificed and perfused with saline followed by 10% formalin. Sections, 50 microns thick, were cut on a freezing microtome. Prints were made by mounting each unstained section of a microscope slide and placing them in a standard photographic enlarger. The electrode tips of Pigeons 93 and 119 were located in the paleostriatal complex. The sections of Pigeon 95 were damaged and precise localization was not possible. Further work in this laboratory has also found that, using the same coordinates, electrode tips tend to fall in the paleostriatum, rather than in the more dorsal ectostriatum at which they are aimed. The paleostriatal placements tended to sustain self-stimulation, whereas others located in the ectostriatum sustained relatively low or unstable rates.     

The relation between the generalized matching law and signal-detection theory

The generalized matching law can be applied to a signal-detection matrix to give two equations. The first relates responding in the presence of the stimulus to the reinforcements for the responses, and the second relates responding in the absence of the stimulus to the reinforcements for the responses. Evidence for stimulus discrimination is given by biases that are opposite in sign in the two equations. As the logarithmic ratio and z proportion transformations are similar, the combination of the absolute values of the two logarithmic biases gives a measure equivalent to the signal-detection measures d′ and η. The two equations can also be combined to eliminate the biases caused by the signalling stimuli and to produce a generalized matching-law statement relating overall performance to the obtained reinforcements.     

A test of precategorical and attentional explanations of speech suffix interference

It is well-known that a redundant item or “stimulus suffix”, which does not have to be recalled, which is spoken, and which terminates the presentation of a beyond span-length sequence of to-be-remembered (TBR) spoken items, will generate considerable interference in immediate serial recall. Previous work has established that speech suffix interference is not influenced by a number of intrinsic attributes of the suffix. A limitation of this work, however, is the fact that in each study there has been little if any disparity between TBR sequence and suffix in terms of extrinsic attributes. Experiment I extends this work and showed that at least one intrinsic attribute of the suffix (personal significance) has no effect on suffix interference when there is also a marked disparity between TBR sequence and suffix in terms of one specific extrinsic attribute (spatial location). Experiment II simply served to eliminate one possible artifactual explanation of this finding. The result appears to have some theoretical importance since it is inconsistent with Kahneman's (1973) attentional account of suffix interference and with one interpretation of a precategorical hypothesis due to Morton, Crowder and Prussin (1971).