Response suppression by visual stimuli paired with postsession d-amphetamine injections in the pigeon

Responding of pigeons, maintained under a fixed-interval 3-minute schedule of food presentation, was decreased on days that the color of the lights illuminating the food magazine was changed and d-amphetamine (1.0 mg/kg, i.m.) was injected after the session. Responding was not decreased by keylight color changes paired with postsession d-amphetamine or by postsession injections of saline. Administration of pentobarbital (3.0 to 5.6 mg/kg), but not d-amphetamine (.3 to 3.0 mg/kg), before the session increased rates of responding suppressed by drug-paired magazine lights. Responding maintained under a fixed-ratio 30-response schedule was not decreased when differently colored magazine lights were paired with a low (.3 mg/kg) postsession dose of d-amphetamine; with high (3.0 mg/kg) postsession doses, however, responding was completely suppressed after two pairings. The effects of pairing magazine stimuli with an intermediate (1.0 mg/kg) postsession dose of d-amphetamine depended upon the magnitude of prior postsession doses. After being paired with a low dose, stimuli paired with 1.0 mg/kg did not suppress responding. After being paired with a high dose, stimuli paired with 1.0 mg/kg completely suppressed responding. The suppression of food-maintained responding by stimuli paired with postsession drug administration depends upon both behavioral and pharmacological variables.     

Conditioned reinforcement by conditional discriminative stimuli.

A concurrent-chains schedule was used to examine how a delay to conditional discriminative stimuli affects conditioned reinforcement strength. Pigeons' key-peck responses in the initial link produced either of two terminal links according to independent variable-interval 30-s schedules. Each terminal link involved an identical successive conditional discrimination and was segmented into three links: a delay interval (green), a color conditional discriminative stimulus (blue or red), and a line conditional discriminative stimulus (vertical or horizontal lines). Food delivery occurred 45 s after entering the terminal link with a probability of .5, but its conditional probability (1.0 or 0) depended on the combination of the color and the line stimuli. One of the color stimuli occurred independently of further responding, 5 s after entry into the right terminal link, but it occurred 35 s after entry into the left terminal link. One of the line stimuli occurred independently of responding 40 s after entry into either terminal link, synchronized with the offset of the color stimulus. The initial-link relative response rate for the right was consistently higher in comparison with a control condition in which the color stimuli occurred 20 s after entry into either terminal link. The preference for the short delay to the color conditional discriminative stimuli suggests the possibility of conditioned reinforcement by information about the relation between the line conditional discriminative stimuli and the outcomes.     

Concurrent schedules: Interaction of reinforcer frequency and reinforcer duration

Six pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval schedules with unequal reinforcer durations for the two responses. The schedules arranged on the two keys were kept equal while they were varied in absolute size. As the overall reinforcer rate was increased, both response-allocation and time-allocation measures of choice showed a trend toward indifference, and measures of sensitivity to reinforcer-duration ratios significantly decreased. Recent reports have shown that the generalized matching law cannot describe the changes in behavior allocation under constant delay-, duration-, or rate-ratios when changes are made in the absolute levels of each of these variables. The present results complement these findings by demonstrating that the concatenated generalized matching law cannot describe the interactions of two reinforcer variables on behavior allocation.     

Control of behavior by an establishing stimulus

Seventeen pigeons were exposed to a three-key discrete-trial procedure in which a peck on the lit center key produced food if, and only if, the left keylight was lit. The center key was illuminated by a peck on the lit right key. Of interest was whether subjects pecked the right key before or after the response-independent onset of the left keylight. Pecks on the right key after left-keylight onset suggest control of behavior by the left keylight—an establishing stimulus. In three experiments, the strength of center-keylight onset as conditioned reinforcer for a response on the right key was manipulated by altering the size of the reduction in time to food delivery correlated with its onset. Control of pigeons' key pecks by onset of the left keylight occurred on more trials per session when the center keylight was a relatively weak conditioned reinforcer and on fewer trials per session when the center keylight was a relatively strong condtioned reinforcer. Differences across conditions in the degree of control by onset of the establishing stimulus were greatest when changes in conditioned reinforcer strength occurred relatively frequently and were signaled. The results provide evidence of the function of an establishing stimulus.     

Information on response requirements compared with information on food density as a reinforcer of observing in pigeons

On a variable-interval schedule, pecking the key to the pigeon's right (observing response) produced red or green displays relating to the delivery of grain and its dependence on pecking the key to the left (food key). During various blocks of sessions, mixed (no stimulus change) schedules including the following pairs of components were temporarily converted by the observing response to their corresponding multiple (correlated stimuli) schedules: variable-interval 60-s, extinction; variable-interval 60-s, variable-time (response-independent) 60-s; extinction, variable-time 60-s. Differences in food delivery maintained substantial rates of responding on the observing key, without regard to pecking requirements on the food key. Although stimuli correlated with differences in the response requirement on the food key maintained higher observing rates than those maintained by uncorrelated stimuli, they were much lower than those based on food. The value of predictive stimuli as reinforcers is determined by the value of the events predicted. In particular, the cost of pecking appears to be low, and this may place limitations on the applicability of energy-based and economic models of behavior.     

Some effects of response-correlated increases in reinforcer magnitude on human behavior

After training under short or long fixed-interval schedules, humans responded under a modified fixed-interval schedule in which magnitude of reinforcement (X or 2X) was minimally correlated with response frequency. Response frequencies that equaled or exceeded a minimum response criterion were followed by the larger reinforcer at the end of the interval; otherwise, the smaller reinforcer was delivered. The modified schedule alternated with the baseline schedule across conditions. In a control condition, the reinforcer magnitudes produced by control subjects were yoked to those of experimental subjects. Experimental subjects, but not control subjects, showed increased responding. In addition to the baseline and modified fixed-interval schedules used in Experiment 1, subjects in Experiment 2 also responded under a second modified fixed-interval contingency in which increases in reinforcer magnitude were more highly correlated with response frequency. Experimental subjects, but not control subjects, showed increased responding under both procedures. Direct comparison of these two procedures showed that the high-correlation procedure produced greater increases in responding than did the low-correlation procedure.     

Determinants of pausing under variable-ratio schedules: Reinforcer magnitude, ratio size, and schedule configuration

Pigeons pecked a key under two-component multiple variable-ratio schedules that offered 8-s or 2-s access to grain. Phase 1 assessed the effects of differences in reinforcer magnitude on postreinforcement pausing, as a function of ratio size. In Phase 2, postreinforcement pausing and the first five interresponse times in each ratio were measured as a function of differences in reinforcer magnitude under equal variable-ratio schedules consisting of different configurations of individual ratios. Rates were also calculated exclusive of postreinforcement pause times in both phases. The results from Phase 1 showed that as ratio size increased, the differences in pausing educed by unequal reinforcer magnitudes also increased. The results of Phase 2 showed that the effects of reinforcer magnitude on pausing and IRT durations were a function of schedule configuration. Under one configuration, in which the smallest ratio was a fixed-ratio 1, pauses were unaffected by magnitude but the first five interresponse times were affected. Under the other configuration, in which the smallest ratio was a fixed-ratio 7, pauses were affected by reinforcer magnitude but the first five interresponse times were not. The effect of each configuration seemed to be determined by the value of the smallest individual ratio. Rates calculated exclusive of postreinforcement pause times were, in general, directly related to reinforcer magnitude, and the relation was shown to be a function of schedule configuration.     

Within-session meal-size effects on induced drinking.

As a control for the effects of session duration and hunger on the relation between food magnitude and induced drinking, four food-deprived rats were exposed to a variable-time 50-s schedule of food delivery in which the size of each food delivery varied randomly within sessions. Food-related behavior and schedule-induced drinking per opportunity were examined as functions of meal size and postfood time. All rats showed an inverted-U-shaped relation between drinking per opportunity and meal size. This relation was caused by variation in the percentage of intervals that contained drinking and by variation in the number of drinking bouts per interval, rather than by bout duration or by the amount of drinking within those intervals that actually contained drinking. Head-in-feeder time increased linearly with meal size. Schedule-induced drinking was entrained by food delivery in 3 of 4 subjects; the entrainment was due to regulation of the starting time of each drinking bout rather than to regulation of bout duration.     

Sensitivity to reinforcer duration in a self-control procedure

In a concurrent-chains procedure, pigeons' responses on left and right keys were followed by reinforcers of different durations at different delays following the choice responses. Three pairs of reinforcer delays were arranged in each session, and reinforcer durations were varied over conditions. In Experiment 1 reinforcer delays were unequal, and in Experiment 2 reinforcer delays were equal. In Experiment 1 preference reversal was demonstrated in that an immediate short reinforcer was chosen more frequently than a longer reinforcer delayed 6 s from the choice, whereas the longer reinforcer was chosen more frequently when delays to both reinforcers were lengthened. In both experiments, choice responding was more sensitive to variations in reinforcer duration at overall longer reinforcer delays than at overall shorter reinforcer delays, independently of whether fixed-interval or variable-interval schedules were arranged in the choice phase. We concluded that preference reversal results from a change in sensitivity of choice responding to ratios of reinforcer duration as the delays to both reinforcers are lengthened.     

DOES CONTINGENT REINFORCEMENT STRENGTHEN OPERANT BEHAVIOR?

In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained to peck keys with equal food-reinforcement schedules in components that ended with either noncontingent or contingent transitions to a third component with a five-fold richer schedule. Response rates were higher in the initial component with contingent transitions, but resistance to prefeeding or extinction was not consistently greater. Experiment 2 also included noncontingent or contingent transitions to a signaled period of nonreinforcement. There was no effect of the contingency on transitions to nonreinforcement, but the difference in response rates maintained by contingent versus noncontingent transitions to the richer schedule was replicated. In addition, response rates were higher in components that preceded nonreinforcement than in components that preceded the richer schedule. However, resistance to extinction was greater for noncontingent transitions to the richer schedule than to nonreinforcement, implicating stimulus–reinforcer relations in the determination of resistance to change. Resistance to change was also somewhat greater for noncontingent than for contingent transitions to the richer schedule. The latter result, together with the results of Experiment 1 and related research, suggests that response-contingent reinforcement does not increase resistance to change.