The momentum of human behavior in a natural setting

Adults with mental retardation in a group home received popcorn or coffee reinforcers for sorting plastic dinnerware. In Part 1 of the experiment, reinforcers were dispensed according to a variable-interval 60-s schedule for sorting dinnerware of one color and according to a variable-interval 240-s schedule for sorting dinnerware of a different color in successive components of a multiple schedule. Sorting rates were similar in baseline, but when a video program was shown concurrently, sorting of dinnerware was more resistant to distraction when correlated with a higher rate of reinforcement. In Part 2 of the experiment, popcorn or coffee reinforcers were contingent upon sorting both colors of dinnerware according to variable-interval 60-s schedules, but additional reinforcers were given independently of sorting according to a variable-time 30-s schedule during one dinnerware-color component. Baseline sorting rate was lower but resistance to distraction by the video program was greater in the component with additional variable-time reinforcers. These results demonstrate that resistance to distraction depends on the rate of reinforcers obtained in the presence of component stimuli but is independent of baseline response rates and response–reinforcer contingencies. Moreover, these results are similar to those obtained in laboratory studies with pigeons, demonstrating that the determination of resistance to change by stimulus–reinforcer relations is not confined to controlled laboratory settings or unique to the pigeon.     

Differential reinforcement and signal detection.

Reinforcement was introduced for responses normally treated as errors in signal-detection procedures. The first experiment used a standard two-response discrete-trial procedure with no reinforcement for errors. Results showed that rats altered their response biases but maintained constant sensitivity to visual signals when reinforcement probabilities varied, and that their sensitivity depended on the physical difference between signals, in accordance with the predictions of signal-detection theory. Experiment II, with rats, and Experiment III, with pigeons, demonstrated that sensitivity decreased in this procedure when reinforcement was scheduled for errors with the signals held constant, despite independence of overall number of reinforcers and sensitivity. Experiment IV, with rats, replicated the decrease in sensitivity in a continuous procedure employing only one response. The decrements in sensitivity were similar across Experiments II, III, and IV, and accorded well with earlier research. Thus, contrary to a fundamental assumption of signal-detection theory, estimates of sensitivity are not always invariant with respect to the outcomes of responding, but depend on relative reinforcement of correct responses.     

Some effects of correlation between response-contingent shock and reinforcement

Rats responded on a two-component chain schedule in which a response-contingent electric shock at the end of the first component was either positively correlated, negatively correlated, or uncorrelated with reinforcement availability in the second component. With 0.4-ma shocks, rate in the first component depended on the shock-reinforcement correlation: when shock and reinforcement availability were positively correlated, after extended exposure to the contingencies, rates exceeded those in the absence of shock; when shock and reinforcement availability were negatively correlated, responding was generally suppressed throughout. The discriminative control of shock over responding in the second component, in which reinforcement was available 50% of the time, also depended somewhat on correlation. However, rate change in the first component was not specifically related to discrimination in the second component. With 0.8-ma shocks, responding was substantially suppressed in the first component at all three values of shock-reinforcement correlations.     

Relative rate of response and relative magnitude of reinforcement in multiple schedules

Pigeons were trained on a multiple schedule in which the duration of access to grain reinforcement was varied independently in the two components. The relative response rate in one component was an increasing function of the relative duration of reinforcement in that component. The similarity of this interaction to that found in multiple schedules of different reinforcement frequency is discussed. Extinction data were also similar to those obtained after training on multiple schedules of different reinforcement frequency.     

Contrast and induction in multiple schedules of discrete-trial concurrent reinforcement

Three pigeons were exposed to two-key discrete-trial concurrent schedules of reinforcement. Red and white key colors alternated irregularly and the assignment of reinforcers depended on key color. The red-key schedules were held constant, with the scheduled relative frequency of reinforcement for left-key pecks set at 0.75, while the white-key schedules varied. When the location of white-key reinforcement was changed from one side to the other, while its overall frequency was constant, red-key choices shifted in the same direction as white-key choices, an induction effect. When the overall frequency of white-key reinforcement was changed while its location remained constant, red key choices shifted in a direction opposite to white-key choices, a contrast effect. Both induction and contrast effects were clearer when the overall frequency of red-key reinforcement was reduced. These data demonstrate that the allocation of responding may exhibit schedule interaction effects similar to those commonly reported for response rate.     

Reinforcement contingencies and signal detection.

Pigeons were trained to discriminate temporal stimuli in a discrete-trial signal-detection procedure. Pecks to one side key were reinforced intermittently after exposure to one duration, and pecks to the other side key were reinforced intermittently after exposure to a different duration. In Experiment I, the allocation of reinforcers was varied systematically for correct responses and for errors, using a procedure that controlled the obtained numbers of reinforcers. When reinforcers were allocated symmetrically, the level of discrimination decreased as the proportion of reinforcers for errors increased. When reinforcers were allocated asymmetrically, the decrease in discrimination was less systematic. Bias toward one or the other side key roughly matched the ratio of reinforcers obtained by pecks at those keys, independent of the level of discrimination. In Experiment II, the overall rate of reinforcement for correct responses was varied both within and between experimental conditions. The level of discrimination was positively related to the overall rate of reinforcement. The discrimination data of both experiments were interpreted in relation to the contingencies of reinforcement and nonreinforcement, characterized by the average difference in reinforcement probability for correct responses and errors.     

Feedback functions for variable-interval reinforcement

On a given variable-interval schedule, the average obtained rate of reinforcement depends on the average rate of responding. An expression for this feedback effect is derived from the assumptions that free-operant responding occurs in bursts with a constant tempo, alternating with periods of engagement in other activities; that the durations of bursts and other activities are exponentially distributed; and that the rates of initiating and terminating bursts are inversely related. The expression provides a satisfactory account of the data of three experiments.     

Causal Inference from Noise

Correlation is not causation is one of the mantras of the sciences—a cautionary warning especially to fields like epidemiology and pharmacology where the seduction of compelling correlations naturally leads to causal hypotheses. The standard view from the epistemology of causation is that to tell whether one correlated variable is causing the other, one needs to intervene on the system—the best sort of intervention being a trial that is both randomized and controlled. In this paper, we argue that some purely correlational data contains information that allows us to draw causal inferences: statistical noise. Methods for extracting causal knowledge from noise provide us with an alternative to randomized controlled trials that allows us to reach causal conclusions from purely correlational data.     

Effects of unsignaled delay of reinforcement on preference and resistance to change

In Phase 1, pigeons were trained on a concurrent chain in which a 3-s unsignaled delay of reinforcement was imposed on responding in a terminal link in some conditions. Preference for that terminal link was always reduced in comparison with conditions in which there was no delay, substantially so for 3 of the 4 pigeons. In Phase 2, pigeons responded in a two-component multiple schedule. The scheduled rates of reinforcement were equal, but a 3-s unsignaled delay was imposed in one component. Resistance of responding to prefeeding and extinction was reduced in the delay component for the same 3 subjects for which the data had shown strong effects of delay on preference. Systematic observation revealed differences in response topography. In the delay component, subjects oriented more closely to the key and responses were less forceful compared with the no-delay component. Our results give further evidence that preference and resistance to change covary within subjects. However, they challenge the premise that the critical determiners of preference (i.e., terminal-link value) and resistance to change (behavioral mass) may be quantified purely in terms of stimulus—reinforcer relations.