Determinants of human performance on concurrent schedules.

Six experiments, each with 5 human adults, were conducted to investigate the determinants of human performance on multiple concurrent variable-interval schedules. A two-key procedure was employed in which subjects' key presses produced points exchangeable for money. Variables manipulated across experiments were (a) changeover delay (Experiments 2, 4, and 6), (b) ordinal cues related to scheduled reinforcement frequencies (Experiments 3 and 4), and (c) instructions describing the ordinal relations between schedule-correlated stimuli and scheduled reinforcement frequency (Experiments 5 and 6). The performances of only 13 of the 30 subjects could be described by the generalized matching equation and were within a range of values typical of those reported in the animal literature. Eight subjects showed indifference, 9 undermatched, 7 approximated matching, 3 overmatched, and a further 3 responded exclusively to the richer component of the concurrent schedules. These differing modes of responding were closely related to the different types of performance rules reported by subjects in postexperimental questionnaires. The results are in good agreement with those from studies of human performance on single schedules, suggesting that rule-governed behavior, in interaction with contingencies, may be an important determinant of human choice.     

The Acquisition of Time Properties Associated with a Sequential Motor Skill

Three experiments are reported that examined the relative importance of phasing and duration training in the motor learning of a sequential task. In all three experiments, the task involved knocking down three barriers in a specified order. The Phasing task required the subject to contact each of the barriers in a particular goal time interval, that is, each segment had a particular movement-time goal. The Duration task required the subject to contact the final barrier in a total elapsed-time goal defined by the experimenter. Following training, half of the subjects in each training condition transferred to either a novel Duration or a novel Phasing task. Phasing-trained subjects, compared to Duration-trained subjects, produced equivalent transfer performance on the Duration transfer task but superior performance on the Phasing transfer task. These results suggest that phasing serves as a higher-order source of information for the performer in a sequential motor task. In addition, these experiments complement and extend previous work by Shapiro (1977) and Summers (1975) which demonstrated that learned phasing patterns were not modified despite changes in the overall rate of performing a motor sequence. Our experiments indicate that phasing training increases the performer’s sensitivity to phasing patterns such that novel temporal patterns can be produced when they are well-defined.     

Effect of variable-interval punishment on the behavior of humans in variable-interval schedules of monetary reinforcement

One male and three female human subjects pressed a button for monetary reinforcement under a range of variable-interval schedules specifying different frequencies of reinforcement. On alternate days, responding was also punished (by subtraction of money) according to a variable-interval 170-second schedule. In the absence of punishment, the rate of responding was an increasing negatively accelerated function of reinforcement frequency, as predicted by Herrnstein's equation. The effect of the punishment schedule was to suppress responding under lower frequencies of reinforcement; responding under higher reinforcement frequencies was much less affected. This was reflected in an increase in the value of K_H (the constant expressing the reinforcement frequency corresponding to the half-maximal response rate), whereas there was no significant change in the value of R_max (the constant expressing the maximum response rate). Previous results had shown that variable-ratio punishment resulted in a change in the values of both constants (Bradshaw, Szabadi, and Bevan, 1977). The results of the present study were consistent with the concept that the suppressive effects of punishment on responding depend on the nature of the punishment schedule.     

Schedule-induced biting under fixed-interval schedules of food or electric-shock presentation

Squirrel monkeys pressed a lever under fixed-interval schedules of food or of electric-shock presentation. Both schedules induced repeated biting on a latex hose. Whether lever pressing was controlled by food or by electric shock, a pattern of decreasing hose biting and increasing lever pressing occurred within fixed-interval cycles. As the fixed-interval duration was increased from 6 to 600 sec, average rates of lever pressing decreased under both schedules. Average rates of hose biting first increased with increasing parameter value, reaching a maximum at values that varied from 60 to 337 sec in different monkeys, and then declined at higher values. d-Amphetamine at appropriate doses increased overall rates of lever pressing maintained by food or by shock, but either did not affect or decreased overall rates of hose biting. When no timeout period occurred between fixed-interval cycles, the monkeys bit most frequently immediately after food or electric shock was presented. When there was a timeout period, hose biting began shortly after the start of the fixed-interval cycles, with little or no hose biting immediately after food or electric shock was presented. Most hose biting appeared to be schedule-induced rather than food- or shock-induced.     

Behavioral contrast in competitive and noncompetitive environments

Three experiments examined the effects of opportunities for an alternative response (drinking) on positive behavioral contrast of rats' food-reinforced bar pressing. In both Experiments 1 and 2 the baseline multiple variable-interval schedules were rich (variable interval 10-s), and contrast was examined both with and without a water bottle present. In Experiment 1, the rats were not water deprived. When one component of the multiple schedule was changed to extinction, the rate of bar pressing increased in the constant component (positive behavioral contrast). The magnitude of contrast was larger when the bottle was absent than when it was present, as predicted by the matching law. Drinking did not shift from the constant variable-interval component to the extinction component, as might have been expected from competition theory. In Experiment 2, the rats were water deprived. Contrast was larger when the bottle was present than when it was absent, and drinking did shift to the extinction component, as predicted by competition theory. In Experiment 3, water-deprived rats responded on leaner multiple variable-interval schedules (60-s) in the presence of a water bottle. When one component was changed to extinction, contrast did not occur, and drinking did not shift to the extinction component. The present results suggest that there are at least two different sources of behavioral contrast: “competitive” contrast, observed when an alternative response occurs with high probability, and “noncompetitive” contrast, observed when an alternative response occurs with low probability. The results, in conjunction with earlier studies, also suggest that the form of the alternative response and the rate of food reinforcement provided by the multiple schedule combine to determine the amount of contrast.