Repeated diazepam administration: effects on the acquisition and performance of response chains in humans.

The effects of repeated diazepam administration (80 mg) were assessed across a 12-hr time course with humans responding under a two-component multiple schedule of repeated acquisition and performance of response sequences. Subjects resided in an inpatient clinical research ward for the duration of the study. In each component of the multiple schedule, subjects completed sequences of 10 responses in a predetermined order using three keys of a numeric keypad. In the acquisition component, a new response sequence was to be acquired each session. In the performance component, the response sequence always remained the same. After stable responding was obtained and the effects of the placebo assessed, diazepam was administered for 3 consecutive days. The effects of repeated diazepam administration on overall percentage of errors across the two components of the multiple schedule were selective. In the acquisition component, the first dose of diazepam increased percentage errors with the magnitude of effects decreasing across the second and third days of diazepam administration. In the performance component, the percentage of errors was either minimally affected across all 3 days of diazepam administration or substantively increased on Day 1 with subsequent diazepam administrations having minimal effects. Effects on response rate were not selective. Diazepam decreased rates of responding in both schedule components, with the magnitude of effects decreasing across successive administrations. These results replicate previous findings in humans and nonhumans on the selective effects of diazepam on acquisition versus performance baselines. Also, the results suggest that the selective effects do not result from differences in reinforcement rate. Finally, the present results demonstrate that the selective recovery from repeated drug administration previously demonstrated in nonhumans using a repeated acquisition arrangement has generality to human behavior.     

The varying presuppositional nature of comparatives

The presuppositional nature of different types of comparatives was studied by obtaining subjects' judgments concerning the synonymity of pairs of comparative statements and the acceptability of single comparative statements. The results indicated that, in general, significantly greater presupposition was involved in the negative comparatives (e.g.,Bob is not as large as Fred) than in the positive comparatives (e.g.,Fred is larger than Bob), in the extreme comparatives (e.g.,Fred is more saintly than Bob) than in the regular comparatives (e.g.,Fred is better than Bob), in the ordinal comparatives (e.g.,Bob is more agile than Fred) than in the ratio comparatives (e.g.,Bob is heavier than Fred), and in the marked comparatives (e.g.,Bob is worse than Fred) than in the unmarked comparatives (e.g.,Fred is better than Bob). The results also indicated that comparative statements containing marked adjectives from a ratio scale can be interpreted neutrally. The implications of these results for the linguistic distinction between marked and unmarked adjectives are discussed. Presuppositions were found to apply equally to the subject and object terms of a comparative statement. In general, the results suggest that presuppositional effects are quite systematic and accumulative in nature.     

Comments on cognitive science in the experimental analysis of behavior

Arguments are increasingly being made for the inclusion of cognitive science in the experimental analysis of behavior (TEAB). These arguments are described, and a critical analysis of them is presented, especially in regards to the logic of objective inference and the renewed use of cognitive intervening variables. In addition, one particular defining feature of cognitive processes (i.e., the absence of an immediate controlling stimulus) is described, along with alternative points of view stressing molar-molecular levels of analysis and historical causation. Finally, comments are made on the use of cognitive concepts and language in the behavioral sciences. On all of these issues, counter-arguments are based on available material in behavior analysis metatheory, concepts, and experimental practices.     

Interaction Effect of Extrinsic Rewards and Socioeconomic Strata

In an attempt to account for the poor test performance of lower-SES children, two conflicting theories were examined: (a) the early damage theory holds that lower-SES children have undergone such early and intensive deprivation that they cannot perform in testing situations; (b) the alienation theory contends that the public schools are middle-class institutions with middle-class intrinsic rewards which do not motivate lower-SES children. When faced with the testing situation the children choose not to perform. In order to test these theories, upper- and lower-SES students (N = 250) were randomly assigned to extrinsic and conventional reward conditions. The multivariate analysis of co-variance techniques indicated a significant (.01 level) improvement in the test performance of lower-SES children when extrinsic (money, food) rewards, as well as conventional rewards, are offered. Extrinsic rewards did not significantly improve the test performance of upper-SES children.     

Emergent equivalence relations between interoceptive (drug) and exteroceptive (visual) stimuli.

Conditional "if-then" relations between drug (interoceptive) stimuli and visual (exteroceptive) stimuli were taught to 4 normal humans. Interoceptive stimuli were the effects produced by 0.32 mg/70 kg triazolam (a prototypical benzodiazepine) and placebo (lactose-filled capsules); exteroceptive stimuli were black symbols on white flash cards. Following the training of the prerequisite conditional relations, tests of emergent relations were conducted between exteroceptive stimuli and between interoceptive and exteroceptive stimuli. Equivalence relations emerged immediately without explicit training for all 4 subjects. Accuracy of responding during the interoceptive-exteroceptive equivalence tests and subjects' self-reports showed consistent discrimination between the drug effects of triazolam and placebo. Finally, a generalization test assessed whether a novel visual stimulus presented in the context of the placebo (i.e., no drug) would generalize to visual stimuli belonging to the placebo stimulus class. All 3 subjects who completed this test reliably chose the visual stimuli belonging to the placebo class and not the visual stimuli belonging to the triazolam stimulus class. The development of equivalence relations between interoceptive and exteroceptive stimuli demonstrates that private and public stimulus events can emerge as members of the same equivalence class. Theoretical and clinical implications are discussed.     

The effects of diazepam and triazolam on repeated acquisition and performance of response sequences with an observing response.

Drugs often disrupt the acquisition of new response sequences at doses that fail to disrupt the performance of a previously acquired response sequence. This selective drug effect may result from differences in the control exerted by the stimuli presented after each response in the acquisition and performance sequences. To examine the function of these stimuli, an observing procedure was incorporated into a multiple schedule of repeated acquisition and performance of response sequences, in which stimulus presentations were contingent upon an observing response. Three experiments were conducted with humans. Experiment 1 compared responding with and without the observing contingency. No difference was found in the overall percentage of errors across the two conditions. Within the observing condition, observing behaviour was maintained in the acquisition component as long as errors occurred, but was not maintained in the performance component. Experiment 2 examined whether a contingency that increased errors also would increase observing in both the acquisition and performance components. Specifically, reinforcer delivery in each component was contingent upon emitting 10 correct responses and one, two, or four errors. Observing responses increased in the acquisition component as the error requirement increased, whereas observing responses in the performance component increased only when the error requirement was four. Experiment 3 assessed the effects of diazepam (0, 7.5, 15, and 30 mg/70 kg, p.o.) and triazolam (0, 0.375, and 0.75 mg/70 kg, p.o.) on repeated acquisition and performance baselines with the observing contingency. Selective drug effects were obtained in this modified procedure; that is, the percentage of errors in the acquisition component increased at doses that failed to affect the percentage of errors in the performance components. Importantly, drug effects were selective, even though observing responses were not emitted in the performance component and, hence, the stimulus presentations did not occur in that component. These findings suggest that alternative explanations for these differential effects are needed; in that regard, a response-unit account of the selective drug effects is discussed.     

Memory Errors From A Change of Standard: A Lack of Awareness or of Understanding?

Memory errors occur when the context standard that is used when judging target behaviors is different from the category norm standard that is available later when the behaviors are recalled. Is insufficient awareness the reason for this change-of-standard effect? Two kinds of awareness were maximized in each of two studies: (a) awareness of the relation between the judgment and the context - telling subjects to be sure to use the non-target persons for comparison when judging the target person (salience); and (b) awareness at recall of the earlier judgmental context - asking subjects to recall the non-target persons before recalling the target person (reinstatement). Context reinstatement reduced memory errors. But when context reinstatement and salience were combined, the memory errors reappeared. In Study 2, an attempt at debiasing failed. The change-of-standard effect is explained in terms of a "natural" tendency to use the current categorical meaning of a judgment to reconstruct the referent of its past contextualized meaning.     

The consequence of refreshing for access to nonselected items in young and older adults

We examined the effect of competition on briefly thinking of just-seen items. In Experiment 1, participants saw a set of either three related or three unrelated words and then read one of the words again (repeat) or thought briefly of one of the words (refresh). Participants read the set a second time, after which they either refreshed a second word from the set or read a new word. In comparison with reading a new word, response times were slower for refreshing the second item when participants had just refreshed than when they had just repeated the first item. This increase was larger for related words than for unrelated words and for older adults than for younger adults. In Experiment 2, a negative impact of refreshing was observed when participants repeated a different word from the set. The pattern of findings suggests that the negative impact of refreshing comes from increased competition from the refreshed item, rather than from inhibition of the nonrefreshed items.     

Exploring the complexities of value creation: The role of engagement strength

Regulatory engagement theory (Higgins, E. T. (2006). Value from hedonic experience and engagement. Psychological Review, 113, 439–460; Higgins, E.T. &; Scholer, A.A. (2009). Engaging the consumer: The science and art of the value creation process. Journal of Consumer Psychology) proposes that engagement strength plays a critical role in the creation of value intensity. We discuss the ways in which engagement, in this model, can be distinguished from arousal, motivation to act, and experienced difficulty. We distinguish between the mechanisms and predictions made by regulatory engagement theory versus cognitive dissonance theory and a goal systems approach. We also describe the complexities and conditions under which some sources of engagement strength (e.g., regulatory fit) may relate to value creation. For instance, while regulatory fit has more typically been associated with increased engagement strength, regulatory nonfit may also sometimes increase engagement by serving as an obstacle to be overcome. We review existing evidence and highlight open questions related to the role of engagement strength in creating value.