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.     

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.     

Differential responding without differential reinforcement: Intensity difference, continuum position, and reinforcement density effects

The response rates of five groups of rats were observed during exposure to different intensities of a four kilohertz tone within a two-component multiple schedule of nondifferential reinforcement. Response rates were found to be higher during the multiple schedule component which contained the higher intensity tone. Larger differences in response rates between the two multiple schedule components occurred with greater intensity separations (30 versus 20 decibels). At the 30 decibel separation a low absolute magnitude produced larger response rate differences than a high absolute magnitude, while at the 20 decibel separation a high absolute magnitude produced larger response rate differences. Increases in reinforcement density were accompanied by decreases in response rate differences between high and low intensity components only when over-all response rates also increased.     

Effects of diazepam on schedule-controlled and schedule-induced behavior under signaled and unsignaled shock.

Schedule-controlled lever pressing and schedule-induced licking were studied in rats under a multiple fixed-interval fixed-interval schedule of food reinforcement upon which was superimposed a multiple variable-time variable-time schedule of electric-shock delivery. Shocks were signaled in one component of the multiple schedule and unsignaled in the other. The effects of diazepam upon the suppression of behavior during the signal (conditioned suppression) and during signaled and unsignaled shock (differential suppression) were studied under several shock intensities (Experiment 1) and at increased body weight (Experiment 2). In each study, diazepam led to dose-dependent increases in the rate of pressing and licking during signaled and unsignaled shock, but had little effect on conditioned suppression. the rate-enhancing effects of diazepam depended upon the intensity of shock, nature of the response, and whether or not shocks were signaled. The data was discussed in terms of (1) implications for understanding the effects of signaled and unsignaled shock on behavior, (2) the effects of diazepam on behavior suppressed by response-independent shock, and (3) comparison between operant and schedule-induced behavior.     

Incentive processes and the peak shift

Intradimensional operant discrimination schedules were employed, which eliminated the covariation of response and reinforcement rates that are found on most operant baselines. In Phase 1, one keylight (S(1)) controlled an increase in pigeons' treadle pressing, relative to another keylight (S(2)), while being correlated with a decrease in frequency of reinforcement. In Phase 2 both treadle pressing and reinforcement increased in the presence of one keylight, relative to the second. In Phase 1 the relatively flat treadle-press generalization gradients peaked at S(1), whereas the peaks of those in Phase 2 were shifted from S(1) in a direction away from S(2). It was postulated that these positive and negative stimulus-reinforcement contingencies influence the likelihood of obtaining peak shift through the operation of a classically conditioned "central motive state." How response-reinforcement and stimulus-reinforcement contingencies might contribute to the development of inhibitory effects of S(2) is discussed. Autoshaped key pecking also was produced by these procedures. During manipulations of stimuli, the gradients obtained for autoshaped key pecking were narrow and sharply peaked at the food-correlated stimulus (S(2)) in Phase 1. This failure to obtain peak shift for an elicited response suggests a difference in discriminative processes operating in classical and instrumental learning.     

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.     

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.     

Conditional discrimination in mentally retarded subjects: programming acquisition and learning set.

In Experiment 1, 3 subjects with retardation were exposed to two visual-visual arbitrary matching-to-sample problems each day. One conditional discrimination was presented under trial-and-error conditions, and the other was presented under a component training procedure. The latter began by establishing the comparison discrimination and its rapid reversal. The successive discrimination between the sample stimuli was established through differential naming. Then, sample naming was maintained in conditional discrimination sessions in which the same sample was presented in blocks of consecutive trials. Block size was decreased across sessions until sample presentation was randomized as in trial-and-error training (but with naming maintained). Two subjects initially learned only with component training. The performance of the 3rd subject was inconsistent across conditional discriminations. One of the successful subjects ultimately learned rapidly and consistently with trial-and-error procedures. Experiment 2 sought to demonstrate learning set in the other 2 subjects. Elements of the component training procedure were withdrawn over successive conditional discriminations. Ultimately, 1 subject nearly always learned under trial-and-error conditions, and the other learned under trial-and-error conditions combined with differential sample naming.     

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.