Verbal self-reports of delayed matching to sample by humans

Undergraduates participated in two experiments to develop methods for the experimental analysis of self-reports about behavior. The target behavior was the choice response in a delayed-matching-to-sample task in which monetary reinforcement was contingent upon both speed and accuracy of the choice. In Experiment 1, the temporal portion of the contingency was manipulated within each session, and the presence and absence of feedback about reinforcement was manipulated across sessions. As the time limits became stricter, target response speeds increased, but accuracy and reinforcement rates decreased. When feedback was withheld, further reductions in speed and reinforcement occurred, but only at the strictest time limit. Thus, the procedures were successful in producing systematic variation in the speed, accuracy, and reinforcement of the target behavior. Experiment 2 was designed to assess the influence of these characteristics on self-reports. In self-report conditions, each target response was followed by a computer-generated query: “Did you earn points?” The subject reported by pressing “Yes” or “No” buttons, with the sole consequence of advancing the session. In some cases, feedback about reinforcement of the target response followed the reports; in other cases it was withheld. Self-reports were less accurate when the target responses occurred under greater time pressure. When feedback was withheld, the speed of the target response influenced reports, in that the probability of a “Yes” report increased directly with the speed of accurate target responses. In addition, imposing the self-report procedure disrupted target performance by reducing response speeds at the strictest time limit. These results allow investigation of issues in both behavioral and cognitive psychology. More important, the overall order in the data suggests promise for the experimental analysis of self-reports by human subjects.     

Effects of response variability on the sensitivity of rule-governed behavior

Two experiments examined the relation between response variability and sensitivity to changes in reinforcement contingencies. In Experiment 1, two groups of college students were provided complete instructions regarding a button-pressing task; the instructions stated “press the button 40 times for each point” (exchangeable for money). Two additional groups received incomplete instructions that omitted the pattern of responding required for reinforcement under the same schedule. Sensitivity was tested in one completely instructed and one incompletely instructed group after responding had met a stability criterion, and for the remaining two groups after a short exposure to the original schedule. The three groups of subjects whose responding was completely instructed or who had met the stability criterion showed little variability at the moment of change in the reinforcement schedule. The responding of these three groups also was insensitive to the contingency change. Incompletely instructed short-exposure responding was more variable at the moment of schedule change and was sensitive to the new contingency in four of six cases. In Experiment 2, completely and incompletely instructed responding first met a stability criterion. This was followed by a test that showed no sensitivity to a contingency change. A strategic instruction was then presented that stated variable responding would work best. Five of 6 subjects showed increased variability after this instruction, and all 6 showed sensitivity to contingency change. The findings are discussed from a selectionist perspective that describes response acquisition as a process of variation, selection, and maintenance. From this perspective, sensitivity to contingency changes is described as a function of variables that produce response variability.     

Behavioral and dimensional contrast in rats.

Rats pressed a nose key for brain stimulation reinforcement presented on a fixed-interval schedule. Stimuli were drawn at random from a continuum of 12 white noise intensities in the range 62-95 decibels, spaced in 3 decibel steps. Experiment 1 varied the number of stimuli and the reinforcement contingencies associated with them. In Condition I (baseline) all stimuli signaled reinforcement; in Conditions II and III stimuli from one half of the continuum signaled reinforcement and those from the other half, extinction. However, in Condition II the 6 stimuli from the middle of the continuum were omitted. Experiment 2 held constant the number of stimuli and varied their spacing. In Condition I, each of 6 sounds signaled reinforcement. In Conditions II and II, three stimuli from one half of the continuum signaled reinforcement and three from the other half, extinction. However, in Condition II the stimuli were near the extremes of the continuum (Stimuli 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 12). Condition III replaced Stimulus 3 with Stimulus 6 and Stimulus 10 with Stimulus 7. Behavioral contrast was seen in an increase over baseline in response rate to the stimuli associated with the constant schedule component when the variable component was changed to extinction. Dimensional contrast was seen in a further elevation of rate to intermediate positive stimulus values when stimuli were added to the border region between positive and negative values.     

Intertrial-interval effects on sensitivity (A') and response bias (B") in a temporal discrimination by rats.

Killeen and Fetterman's (1988) behavioral theory of animal timing predicts that decreases in the rate of reinforcement should produce decreases in the sensitivity (A') of temporal discriminations and a decrease in miss and correct rejection rates (decrease in bias toward "long" responses). Eight rats were trained on a 10- versus 0.1-s temporal discrimination with an intertrial interval of 5 s and were subsequently tested on probe days on the same discrimination with intertrial intervals of 1, 2.5, 5, 10, or 20 s. The rate of reinforcement declined for all animals as intertrial interval increased. Although sensitivity (A') decreased with increasing intertrial interval, all rats showed an increase in bias to make long responses.     

Effects of fixed and variable ratios on human behavioral variability.

The effect that ratio schedules of reinforcement had upon variability of responding was investigated in college students. Subjects were paid $0.02 contingent upon completion of eight presses, distributed in any combination across two push buttons; 256 different sequences were possible. Sequence emission was reinforced according to fixed- and variable-ratio schedules. Ratio requirements of 1, 2, 4 and 8 were presented in alternate components of a multiple schedule. The variability engendered by variable-ratio schedules was also compared to that engendered by fixed ratios. Variability increased with ratio size, irrespective of whether the schedule requirement was fixed or variable. The data demonstrate the similarity between the determinants of human and nonhuman variability, and they illustrate the role of ratio size in determining variability in operant behavior.     

The effect of punishment on free-operant choice behavior in humans

During Phase I, three female human subjects pressed a button for monetary reinforcement in five variable-interval schedules specifying different frequencies of reinforcement. On alternate days, responding was also punished (by subtracting money) according to a variable-ratio 34 schedule. In the absence of punishment, response rates conformed to Herrnstein's equation for single variable-interval schedules. Punishment suppressed responding at all frequencies of reinforcement. This was reflected in a change in the values of both constants in Herrnstein's equation: the value of the theoretical maximum response-rate parameter was reduced, and the parameter describing the reinforcement frequency corresponding to the half-maximal response rate was elevated. During Phase II, the same five schedules (A) were in operation (without punishment), but in addition, a concurrent variable-interval schedule (B) of standard reinforcement frequency was introduced. On alternate days, responding in Component B was punished according to a variable-ratio 34 schedule. In the absence of punishment, absolute response rates conformed to equations proposed by Herrnstein to describe performance in concurrent schedules; the ratios of the response rates in the two components and the ratios of the times spent in the two components conformed to the Matching Law. When responding in Component B was punished, response rates in Component B were reduced and those in Component A were elevated, these changes being reflected in distortions of the matching relationship.