Behavior regulation and learned performance: Some misapprehensions and disagreements

The behavior-regulation approach to learned performance has been the subject of misapprehension and disagreement concerning: (1) the nature and importance of behavior regulation, (2) the definition and role of behavioral set-points, (3) the relation of optimal schedule performance to behavioral set-points, and (4) the question of whether deviations from total responding or from response patterns are the primary determinant of molar responding under schedule constraint. After clarifying the nature and role of behavior regulation and set-points, this paper shows that the data used to question optimal schedule performance (Allison, 1981a) actually strongly support the general behavior-regulation approach. These data also indicate a role for response-pattern set-points in determining schedule behavior, but contradict the hypothesis that deviations from response-pattern characteristics are the primary determinant of molar schedule effects.     

Temporal control by signals of interval duration within variable-interval schedules

Rats' lever pressing produced sucrose reinforcers on a variable-interval schedule where, in different conditions, the duration of a stimulus presented immediately after reinforcement was either correlated or uncorrelated with the duration of the current interreinforcement interval. Under the baseline schedule, in which no stimulus was presented, the minimum interreinforcement interval was 8 s and the mean postreinforcement pause of each subject approximated this value. Response rates increased slowly over the first 10 to 15 s and then remained roughly constant throughout the remainder of the interval. In both the correlated and uncorrelated conditions, the added stimulus resulted in the postreinforcement pauses lengthening to values in excess of the duration of the preceding stimulus. This resulted in a poststimulus pause which was, in most cases, roughly constant irrespective of the duration of the preceding stimulus, or of the reinforcement contingencies prevailing immediately after stimulus offset. Local response-rate patterns in the uncorrelated conditions were similar to those obtained under the baseline schedule in which no stimulus was presented. However, in the correlated condition local response rates increased across the remainder of the interreinforcer interval. Further, the rate of acceleration was inversely related to the duration of the preceding stimulus. These results show that a correlation between stimulus duration and the ensuing time to reinforcement can control behavior—a type of temporal control not previously reported.     

Delay reduction: current status.

Delay-reduction theory states that the effectiveness of a stimulus as a conditioned reinforcer may be predicted most accurately by the reduction in time to primary reinforcement correlated with its onset. We review support for the theory and then discuss two new types of experiments that assess it. One compares models of choice in situations wherein the less preferred outcome is made more accessible; the other investigates whether frequency of conditioned reinforcement affects choice beyond the effect exerted by frequency of primary reinforcement.     

Momentary maximizing in concurrent schedules with a minimum interchangeover interval

Eight pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules with a minimum interchangeover time programmed as a consequence of changeovers. In Experiment 1 the reinforcement schedules remained constant while the minimum interchangeover time varied from 0 to 200 s. Relative response rates and relative time deviated from relative reinforcement rates toward indifference with long minimum interchangeover times. In Experiment 2 different reinforcement ratios were scheduled in successive experimental conditions with the minimum interchangeover time constant at 0, 2, 10, or 120 s. The exponent of the generalized matching equation was close to 1.0 when the minimum interchangeover time was 0 s (the typical procedure for concurrent schedules without a changeover delay) and decreased as that duration was increased. The data support the momentary maximizing theory and contradict molar maximizing theories and the melioration theory.     

TEMPORAL CONTROL ON INTERVAL SCHEDULES: WHAT DETERMINES THE POSTREINFORCEMENT PAUSE?

On fixed-interval or response-initiated delay schedules of reinforcement, the average pause following food presentation is proportional to the interfood interval. Moreover, when a number of intervals of different durations occur in a programmed cyclic series, postreinforcement pauses track the changes in interval value. What controls the duration of postreinforcement pauses under these conditions? Staddon, Wynne, and Higa (1991), in their linear waiting model, propose control by the preceding interfood interval. Another possibility is that delay to reinforcement, signaled by a key peck and/or stimulus change, determines the subsequent pause. The experiments reported here examined the role of these two possible time markers by studying the performance of pigeons under a chained cyclic fixed-interval procedure. The data support the linear waiting model, but suggest that more than the immediately preceding interfood interval plays a role in temporal control.     

Schedule-induced defecation by rats during ratio and interval schedules of food reinforcement.

Lever pressing in rats was maintained by continuous and intermittent schedules of food while defecation was monitored. In Experiment 1, reinforcement densities were matched across variable-ratio and variable-interval schedules for three pairs of rats. Defecation occurred in all 3 rats on the variable-ratio schedule and in all 3 rats on the yoked variable-interval schedule. In Experiment 2, fixed-ratio and fixed-interval schedules with similar reinforcement densities maintained lever pressing. Defecation occurred in 3 of 4 rats on the fixed-ratio schedule and in 4 of 4 rats on the fixed-interval schedule. Almost no defecation occurred during continuous reinforcement in either experiment. These results demonstrate that defecation may occur during both ratio and interval schedules and that the inter-reinforcement interval is more important than the behavioral requirements of the schedule in generating schedule-induced defecation.     

Delayed and current stimulus control in successive discriminations

In a successive discrimination in which successively alternating red and green hues signaled component variable-interval schedules, sensitivity of the ratio of responses in the two components to variation in the component reinforcer ratio decreased systematically during the course of the component. This decrease in stimulus control or discrimination over the course of the component was shown to be the result of delayed control of responding during the component by the stimulus transition between components. When the red–green stimulus transition was altered by interpolating a white stimulus at the end of each 60-s component, discrimination at the beginning of the component (measured by the power-function exponent for sensitivity to reinforcement) was reduced. Conditions with the white stimulus inserted in other quarters of the component indicated that the current discriminative stimulus exerts control over responding throughout the component, whereas during about the first half of the component, response differentials are influenced by the transition between discriminative stimuli.     

Timeout from concurrent schedules.

Response-contingent timeouts of equal duration and frequency were added to both alternatives of unequal concurrent schedules of reinforcement. For each of 4 pigeons in Experiment 1, relative response rates generally became less extreme as the frequency of timeout increased. In Experiment 2, relative response rates consistently approached indifference as the duration of timeout was increased. Variation in time allocation was less consistent in both experiments. Absolute response rates did not vary with the timeout contingency in either experiment. In a third experiment, neither measure of choice varied systematically when the duration of a postreinforcement blackout was varied. In contrast to the present results, preference has been shown to vary directly with the parameters of shock delivery in related procedures. The pattern of results in the first two experiments follows that obtained with other manipulations of the overall rate of reinforcement in concurrent schedules. The results of the third experiment suggest that an intertrial interval following reinforcement is not a critical feature of the overall rate of reinforcement.     

Food and amphetamine self-administration by baboons: effects of alternatives.

The effects of the availability of an alternative reinforcer on responding maintained by food pellets or fluid solutions were examined in 6 adult male baboons (Papio cynocephalus anubis). During daily 23-hr experimental sessions, baboons had concurrent access to both food pellets and fluid, with responding maintained under fixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement that varied between the two commodities. The fixed-ratio requirement, or cost, for pellets was increased when (a) no fluid, (b) a dilute dextrose vehicle, (c) 0.002 mg/kg d-amphetamine, or (d) 0.004 mg/kg d-amphetamine was available. When given nonrestricted concurrent access to food pellets and amphetamine at minimal cost (FR 2), baboons self-administered sufficient amphetamine to decrease pellet intake. Increasing the response requirement for pellets decreased pellet intake at a similar rate regardless of the available fluid and increased fluid intake in a variable manner among baboons such that there were no statistically significant increases in fluid intake. In contrast, when access to pellets was restricted to 70% of maximal intake under nonrestricted conditions, increasing pellet cost decreased pellet intake and increased fluid intake more rapidly when the high amphetamine dose was available. Thus, amphetamine was more effective as an economic substitute for pellets when access to pellets was restricted. The response cost for vehicle and both amphetamine concentrations was increased when baboons had nonrestricted and restricted access to pellets. Increasing the response requirement for fluid delivery decreased intake of all three fluids similarly under both pellet-access conditions. The results indicate that substitution between commodities with minimal commonalities can be studied under controlled laboratory conditions and is dependent upon reinforcement schedule and commodity restrictions.