Effects of short-term isolation on the locomotor activity of the angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare).

Two experiments were conducted to test in angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare) some implications of Gallup and Suarez's (1980) ethological model of open-field behavior and to differentiate between the initial locomotor effects of a novel environment and those of isolation per se. Juveniles placed alone in a novel environment initially showed increased locomotion compared with their previous level when kept as a group and with that of fish placed in the novel environment in groups of three and five. When placed alone in a novel tank, individuals that had already been isolated for 10 days moved about less than those that had been isolated for 4 days. During isolation, angelfish significantly reduced activity to a minimum after 3 to 4 days, and after 10 days the level was still lower than in the group situation. The results suggest that, in addition to birds and rodents, Gallup and Suarez's model is applicable to fish and may account for the effects of longer exposure to a novel environment.     

The effects of isolation rearing on behavioural inhibition in the rat

The possibility that isolation-rearing in the rat affects the development of inhibitory mechanisms was studied in a series of experiments. It was found that socially-isolated rats were (1) slower to learn both a lever-panel alternation, and a two-lever alternation schedule of reinforcement, (2) more persistent than controls in pressing a lever for food when a supply of identical “free food” was introduced into the operant chamber, but (3) similar to control rats in their response to preloading with food, a procedure which inhibited lever pressing to the same extent in the two groups. Finally, it was shown in a separate experiment that the effects of increased food deprivation on lever pressing in the presence of free food were qualitatively different from the effects of social isolation, and therefore the social/isolate difference cannot be interpreted as motivational. The possible contributions of neophobia to the difference are discussed. It is concluded that isolates may well suffer from a disinhibitory defect, but that there are probably other effects of isolation in addition.     

Effects of random reinforcement sequences

Rats were exposed to a random sequence of reinforcement on two levers, such that there was no way to predict from the previous reinforcement which lever would deliver reinforcement next. The rats showed a tendency to repeat the choice that had just produced reinforcement, despite the absence of an overall contingency that differentially reinforced such repetition. However, this tendency decreased with continued exposure to the schedule. Runs of successive reinforcements on a lever increased the probability of pressing that lever, but only slightly, and only in the earlier phases of training. The more quickly a press was made after reinforcement the more likely it was to be on the lever that had delivered that reinforcement. Repetition of choice followed by reinforcement should be viewed as a naturally occurring behavior in the rat, but not necessarily as a behavior that will continue without differential reinforcement of repetition.     

“Level of Aspiration”: Preference for Time Versus Response Feedback and History Effects on the Setting of Personal Performance Standards

Human subjects responded on a computer keyboard and accumulated points according to fixed-ratio (FR) reinforcement schedules. In Experiment 1, subjects responded under a FR 500 schedule. Under baseline conditions satisfying the schedule requirement resulted in counter points and session termination. Subsequently, subjects could (a) choose to have a clock appear on the screen during the interreinforcement interval (IRI) as well as to enter a target time which they would attempt to better during that session, (b) choose to enter a target time or respond under baseline conditions, and (c) enter a target time and choose between having a clock appear throughout or at the end of experimental sessions. In Experiment 2, subjects responded under a FR 500 schedule, entered a target time each session, and could respond during the session to briefly produce either (a) clock feedback, or (b) the number of responses emitted by the subject. In Experiment 3, subjects responded under FR 250, 500, 1000, and 2000 schedule parameters, entered target times and responded for either clock or response feedback. Subjects (a) preferred responding under conditions in which target times were entered to responding under baseline conditions, (b) preferred to have the clock illuminated throughout rather than at the end of experimental sessions, (c) preferred response to clock feedback under all schedule parameters, (d) responded to having equaled or bettered a target time by lowering target time for the subsequent session, and (e) responded to having missed a target time by maintaining the same time during the subsequent session. The results were interpreted within the context of behavior analytic as opposed to more traditional personality theory.

     

Discrimination between reinforced action patterns in the rat

Laboratory rats were rewarded for face-washing, rearing, or scratching by being given the opportunity to press retractable levers for food reward. Yoked control animals received the same number of lever presentations and food rewards, but did not have to face-wash, rear, or scratch to obtain the levers. The experimental animals showed increases in number of bouts of reinforced target behavior above control levels, and the total amount of time spent face-washing increased when a 1.5-sec criterion for reinforced bout length was introduced. The activities in this experiment were made to serve a discriminative as well as an instrumental function, since the cue to tell the rat which lever to press for reward when the levers were presented was the activity that the rat had engaged in to obtain lever presentation. In two separate experiments high levels of discrimination between behaviors were obtained. Discrimination was worse following scratching than after other actions, and scratching also showed relatively poor instrumental conditioning. The relationship between Pavlovian and instrumental conditioning processes in this situation is discussed.