Matching and maximizing with concurrent ratio-interval schedules.

Animals exposed to standard concurrent variable-ratio variable-interval schedules could maximize overall reinforcement rate if, in responding, they showed a strong response bias toward the variable-ratio schedule. Tests with the standard schedules have failed to find such a bias and have been widely cited as evidence against maximization as an explanation of animal choice behavior. However, those experiments were confounded in that the value of leisure (behavior other than the instrumental response) partially offsets the value of reinforcement. The present experiment provides another such test using a concurrent procedure in which the confounding effects of leisure were mostly eliminated while the critical aspects of the concurrent variable-ratio variable-interval contingency were maintained: Responding in one component advanced only its ratio schedule while responding in the other component advanced both ratio schedules. The bias toward the latter component predicted by maximization theory was found.     

Choice for aperiodic versus periodic ratio schedules: A comparison of concurrent and concurrent-chain procedures

Choice between mixed-ratio schedules, consisting of equiprobable ratios of 1 and 99 responses per reinforcement, and fixed-ratio schedules of food reinforcement was assessed by two commonly used procedures: concurrent schedules and concurrent-chains schedules. Rats were trained under concurrent fixed-ratio mixed-ratio schedules, in which both ratio schedules were simultaneously available, and under a concurrent-chains schedule, in which access to one of the mutually exclusive ratio schedules comprising the terminal links was contingent on a single “choice” response. The distribution of responses between the two ratio schedules was taken as the choice proportion under the concurrent procedure, and the distribution of “choice” responses was taken as the choice proportion under the concurrent-chains procedure. Seven of eight rats displayed systematic choice; of those, each displayed nearly exclusive choice for fixed-ratio 35 to the mixed-ratio schedule under the concurrent procedure, but each displayed nearly exclusive choice for the mixed-ratio schedule to fixed-ratio 35 under the concurrent-chains procedure. Thus, preference for a fixed or a mixed schedule of reinforcement depended on the procedure used to assess preference.     

Separating the effects of salience and disparity on the rate of observing

Pigeons producing deliveries of grain on a mixed variable-interval, extinction schedule by pecking a center key could also produce discriminative stimuli on concurrent variable-interval schedules by pecking the left or right observing key. The stimuli produced by each observing key were varied independently. In the first experiment, the negative discriminative stimulus was at the far end of the spectrum from the key illumination accompanying the mixed schedule and from the positive discriminative stimulus. When the magnitude of the difference between the latter two stimuli (salience) was varied, more pecks occurred on the observing key producing the larger of the two differences than on the key producing the smaller difference. In the second experiment, the stimulus accompanying the mixed schedule was at the far end of the spectrum, and the magnitude of the difference between the two discriminative stimuli (disparity) was varied. The proportion of pecks occurring on each observing key shifted systematically in the direction of the key producing the larger difference. The salience of the discriminative stimuli and their disparity each has an independent influence on the frequency of observing when the other is controlled, but the effect of the salience appears to be the more substantial.     

Choice between response units: The rate constancy model

In a conjoint schedule, reinforcement is available simultaneously on two or more schedules for the same response. The present experiments provided food for key pecking on both a random-interval and a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedule. Experiment 1 involved ordinary DRL schedules; Experiment 2 added an external stimulus to indicate when the required interresponse time had elapsed. In both experiments, the potential reinforcer frequency from each component was varied by means of a second-order fixed-ratio schedule, and the DRL time parameter was changed as well. Response rates were described by a model stating that time allocation to each component matches the relative frequency of reinforcement for that component. When spending time in a given component, the subject is assumed to respond at the rate characteristic of baseline performance. This model appeared preferable to the absolute-rate version of the matching law. The model was shown to be applicable to multiple-response concurrent schedules as well as to conjoint schedules, and it described some of the necessary conditions for response matching, undermatching, and bias. In addition, the pigeons did not optimize reinforcer frequency.     

Choice: Some quantitative relations

Six pigeons responded in fifty-six conditions on a concurrent-chains procedure. Conditions included several with equal initial links and unequal terminal links, several with unequal initial links and equal terminal links, and several with both unequal initial and terminal links. Although the delay-reduction hypothesis accounted well for choice when the initial links were equal (mean deviation of .04), it fit the data poorly when the initial links were unequal (mean deviation of .18). A modification of the delay-reduction hypothesis, replacing the rates of reinforcement with the square roots of these rates, fit the data better than either the unmodified delay-reduction equation or Killeen's (1982) model. The modified delay-reduction equation was also consistent with data from prior studies using concurrent chains. The absolute rates of responding in each terminal link were well described by the same hyperbola (Herrnstein, 1970) that describes response rates on simple interval schedules.     

Concurrent choice: Effects of overall reinforcer rate and the temporal distribution of reinforcers

Six pigeons responded on a series of concurrent exponential variable-interval schedules, offering a within-subject comparison with previously published data from concurrent arithmetic variable-interval schedules. Both relative and overall reinforcer rates were varied between conditions. The generalized matching law described the data well, with undermatching much more frequent than strict matching. Time-allocation sensitivity consistently exceeded response-allocation sensitivity for both schedule types, and exponential-schedule sensitivity exceeded arithmetic-schedule sensitivity for both measures of choice. A further set of conditions using variable-interval schedules whose shortest interval was correlated with the mean interval, like arithmetic schedules, but that provided a constant conditional probability of reinforcement, like exponential schedules, produced sensitivities between those produced by conventional arithmetic and exponential schedules. Unlike previous arithmetic-schedule results, exponential sensitivity changed nonmonotonically with changes in overall reinforcer rate. The results clarify our knowledge of the effects of arithmetic and exponential schedules but confuse our understanding of the effects of overall reinforcer rate on concurrent choice.     

Relative sensitivity to reinforcer amount and delay in a self-control choice situation.

Rats were exposed to concurrent-chains schedules in which a single variable-interval schedule arranged entry into one of two terminal-link delay periods (fixed-interval schedules). The shorter delay ended with the delivery of a single food pellet; the longer day ended with a larger number of food pellets (two under some conditions and six under others). In Experiment 1, the terminal-link delays were selected so that under all conditions the ratio of delays would exactly equal the ratio of the number of pellets. But the absolute duration of the delays differed across conditions. In one condition, for example, rats chose between one pellet delayed 5 s and six pellets delayed 30 s; in another condition rats chose between one pellet delayed 10 s and six pellets delayed 60 s. The generalized matching law predicts indifference between the two alternatives, assuming that the sensitivity parameters for amount and delay of reinforcement are equal. The rats' choices were, in fact, close to indifference except when the choice was between one pellet delayed 5 s and six pellets delayed 30 s. That deviation from indifference suggests that the sensitivities to amount and delay differ from each other depending on the durations of the delays. In Experiment 2, rats chose between one pellet following a 5-s delay and six pellets following a delay that was systematically increased over sessions to find a point of indifference. Indifference was achieved when the delay to the six pellets was approximately 55 s. These results are consistent with the possibility that the relative sensitivities to amount and delay differ as a function of the delays.     

Molecular carrier testing for the fragile X syndrome: Issues for genetic counselors

Molecular analysis of the fragile X (FMR-1) gene identifies female fragile X carriers, but appropriate genetic counseling can only be provided if the limitations of the testing methods are understood. Molecular analysis of this gene is achieved with both the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and Southern blot techniques. PCR is faster and can determine the actual number of CGG repeats, which modifies genetic counseling substantially. However, for a sizeable percentage of women, PCR alone is not conclusive, and Southern analysis is necessary to complete the study. While this procedure takes longer, it is usually conclusive. Women who present for genetic counseling and carrier testing in the second trimester of pregnancy need this information quickly, and for them the turn-around time is paramount. It is critical that genetic counselors understand these methods so that they can educate their clients and facilitate appropriate follow-up.     

Effects of reinforcement history on responding under progressive-ratio schedules of reinforcement.

The effects of experimental history on responding under a progressive-ratio schedule of reinforcement were examined. Sixteen pigeons were divided into four equal groups. Groups 1 to 3 were trained to peck a key for food under a fixed-ratio, variable-ratio, or differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule of reinforcement. After training, these pigeons were shifted to a progressive-ratio schedule, later were shifted back to their original schedule (with decreased rates of reinforcement), and finally were returned to the progressive-ratio schedule. Pigeons in Group 4 (control) were maintained on the progressive-ratio schedule for the entire experiment. To test for potential "latent history" effects, pigeons responding under the progressive-ratio schedule were injected with d-amphetamine and given behavioral-momentum tests of prefeeding and extinction. Experimental histories affected responding in the immediate transition to the progressive-ratio schedule; response rates of pigeons with variable-ratio and fixed-ratio histories were higher than rates of pigeons with differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate and progressive-ratio-only histories. Pigeons with differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate histories, and to a lesser degree pigeons with variable-ratio and fixed-ratio histories, also had shorter postreinforcement pauses than pigeons with only a progressive-ratio history. No consistent long-term effects of prior contingencies on responding under the progressive-ratio schedule were evident. d-Amphetamine and resistance-to-change tests failed to reveal consistent latent history effects. The data suggest that history effects are sometimes transitory and not susceptible to latent influences.