Earning and obtaining reinforcers under concurrent interval scheduling

Contingencies of reinforcement specify how reinforcers are earned and how they are obtained. Ratio contingencies specify the number of responses that earn a reinforcer, and the response satisfying the ratio requirement obtains the earned reinforcer. Simple interval schedules specify that a certain time earns a reinforcer, which is obtained by the first response after the interval. The earning of reinforcers has been overlooked, perhaps because simple schedules confound the rates of earning reinforcers with the rates of obtaining reinforcers. In concurrent variable-interval schedules, however, spending time at one alternative earns reinforcers not only at that alternative, but at the other alternative as well. Reinforcers earned for delivery at the other alternative are obtained after changing over. Thus the rates of earning reinforcers are not confounded with the rate of obtaining reinforcers, but the rates of earning reinforcers are the same at both alternatives, which masks their possibly differing effects on preference. Two experiments examined the separate effects of earning reinforcers and of obtaining reinforcers on preference by using concurrent interval schedules composed of two pairs of stay and switch schedules (MacDonall, 2000). In both experiments, the generalized matching law, which is based on rates of obtaining reinforcers, described responding only when rates of earning reinforcers were the same at each alternative. An equation that included both the ratio of the rates of obtaining reinforcers and the ratio of the rates of earning reinforcers described the results from all conditions from each experiment.     

Probabilistic Subset Conjunction

The authors introduce subset conjunction as a classification rule by which an acceptable alternative must satisfy some minimum number of criteria. The rule subsumes conjunctive and disjunctive decision strategies as special cases. Subset conjunction can be represented in a binary-response model, for example, in a logistic regression, using only main effects or only interaction effects. This results in a confounding of the main and interaction effects when there is little or no response error. With greater response error, a logistic regression, even if it gives a good fit to data, can produce parameter estimates that do not reflect the underlying decision process. The authors propose a model in which the binary classification of alternatives into acceptable/unacceptable categories is based on a probabilistic implementation of a subset-conjunctive process. The satisfaction of decision criteria biases the odds toward one outcome or the other. The authors then describe a two-stage choice model in which a (possibly large) set of alternatives is first reduced using a subset-conjunctive rule, after which an alternative is selected from this reduced set of items. They describe methods for estimating the unobserved consideration probabilities from classification and choice data, and illustrate the use of the models for cancer diagnosis and consumer choice. They report the results of simulations investigating estimation accuracy, incidence of local optima, and model fit. The authors thank the Editor, the Associate Editor, and three anonymous reviewers for their constructive suggestions, and also thank Asim Ansari and Raghuram Iyengar for their helpful comments. They also thank Sawtooth Software, McKinsey and Company, and Intelliquest for providing the PC choice data, and the University of Wisconsin for making the breast-cancer data available at the machine learning archives.     

Human Sensitivity To Concurrent Schedules Of Reinforcement: Effects Of Observing Schedule-correlated Stimuli

The determinants of human sensitivity to concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules of reinforcement have been difficult to identify, in part because of procedural differences separating published experiments. This experiment investigated vigilance to stimuli correlated with concurrent schedules. Across phases, 3 college students were provided with either no schedule-correlated stimuli, an observing response that provided brief access to the stimuli, or a contingency that required the subject to identify the stimulus correlated with the source of each obtained reinforcer. Sensitivity, as quantified by the generalized matching equation, was low when no stimuli were available. When the stimuli were response contingent, 1 subject observed them, and her behavior became more sensitive to the distribution of reinforcers across the concurrent schedules. When the procedure required discrimination of the stimulus correlated with each reinforcer, the other 2 subjects also observed the stimuli, and their schedule sensitivity was increased as well. These results implicate procedural differences, rather than inherent behavioral differences, as the source of differences in sensitivity to schedules of reinforcement between humans and nonhumans.     

Drug discrimination using a conditioned taste-aversion paradigm in rhesus monkeys.

The development of drug discrimination was assessed in rhesus monkeys using the conditioned taste-aversion paradigm. Monkeys were initially trained to respond under a fixed-ratio 30-response schedule of food-pellet delivery to assess the rate-decreasing effects of alprazolam (0.03 to 3 mg/kg, i.m., 60 min presession). Alprazolam decreased responding at doses greater than 0.1 mg/kg. Discriminative stimulus effects of alprazolam were then assessed by giving 0.03 mg/kg before sessions in which 1.8 mEq/kg lithium chloride was given immediately after the session (alprazolam/lithium session). On intervening days, saline was given before and after the session (saline/saline session). Rates of responding decreased over successive alprazolam/lithium sessions and also during the saline/saline session that immediately followed an alprazolam/lithium session. During subsequent saline/saline sessions, rates of responding returned to levels near baseline rates within two to four sessions. The discriminative stimulus effects of alprazolam were then assessed by giving 0.1 mg/kg before sessions in which 1 mg/kg d-amphetamine was given immediately after the session (alprazolam/d-amphetamine session). Rates of responding decreased during subsequent alprazolam/d-amphetamine sessions in drug-experienced monkeys, but did not decrease during intervening saline/saline sessions. These findings demonstrate that drug stimuli associated with postsession drug injections can rapidly develop control over behavior and suggest that similar methods be explored in the assessment of drug discrimination.     

Effects of different accessibility of reinforcement schedules on choice in humans

Based on the delay-reduction hypothesis, a less profitable schedule should be rejected if its duration exceeds the mean delay to reinforcement. It should be accepted if its duration is shorter than the mean delay. This was tested for humans, using a successive-choice schedule. The accessibility of the less profitable (variable-interval 18 s) schedule was varied by changing the duration (in terms of a fixed interval) of the waiting-time component preceding its presentation. Forty-eight students were randomly assigned to three groups. In Phase 1, the duration of the less profitable schedule equaled the mean delay to reinforcement in all groups. In Phase 2, waiting time preceding the less profitable schedule was reduced in Group 1 and increased in Group 2. Thus, the schedule was correlated either with a relative delay increase (Group 1) or a delay reduction (Group 2). In Group 3, conditions remained unchanged. As predicted, acceptance of the less profitable schedule decreased in Group 1 and increased in Group 2. The increased acceptance in Group 2 was accompanied by a decreased acceptance of the more profitable (variable-interval 3 s) schedule, resembling a pattern of negative contrast. Response rates were higher under the component preceding (a) the more profitable schedule in Group 1 and (b) the less profitable schedule in Group 2. Implications for the modification of human choice behavior are discussed.     

Stimulus properties of conspecific behavior

Two experiments identified the conditions in which the behavior of one bird acquired discriminative control of the behavior of a second bird. The schedule-controlled behaviors of the “stimulus” bird were differentially correlated with the components of a multiple schedule according to which the pecking of an “experimental” bird produced food. In Experiment 1, three pairs of pigeons acquired a successive discrimination and two reversals with the conspecific stimuli. Experiment 2 included a control condition in which no systematic relationship existed between the conspecific stimuli and the component schedules. While differential responding during the components of the multiple schedule was again found when the conspecific stimuli were available, differential responding did not occur in the control condition. Test conditions included in the experiments indicated that (a) the differential responding was not dependent on the discriminative properties of reinforcement, (b) the pecking of the stimulus and experimental birds was temporally interrelated, (c) the visual conspecific stimuli were critical to the maintenance of the discrimination, and (d) the observed stimulus control immediately generalized to an unfamiliar conspecific.     

Percentage reinforcement and choice

Pigeons responded on identical concurrent variable-interval schedules (choice phase), producing outcomes of either periodic reinforcement schedules always terminating in reinforcement (reliable schedule) or otherwise identical schedules providing reinforcement on only a percentage of instances (percentage reinforcement schedule). Comparisons of this type constituted two assessments of the generality of preference for percentage reinforcement reported by Kendall (1974). In a third set of conditions, a reliable schedule was pitted against a percentage reinforcement schedule in which the more negative outcome was a leaner schedule of reinforcement (rather than nonreinforcement, as in the other two conditions). In all three types of conditions, the schedule providing the higher rate of reinforcement was preferred. Results from a subsequent manipulation suggest that Kendall's contrasting results may have depended on the fact that the stimuli in his choice phase (unlit keys) were physically identical to the stimulus correlated with the nonchosen outcome in his outcome phase.     

Separating the reinforcing and discriminative properties of brief-stimulus presentations in second-order schedules.

Pigeons' responses were maintained under multiple schedules to study properties of briefly presented stimuli. Responses in one component produced food according to a second-order schedule with fixed-interval components in which food or a brief stimulus occurred with equal probability. In the second component responses produced only the brief stimulus under a fixed-ratio schedule. Under various conditions the brief stimulus in the first component was (a) paired with food, (b) not paired with food, (c) partially omitted, or (d) scheduled simultaneously with the second-order schedule under an independent variable-interval schedule. Paired and nonpaired brief stimuli maintained similar response patterning in the second-order schedule. However, only paired stimuli maintained responses in the second component. The data suggest that nonpaired brief stimuli engender response patterning in second-order schedules as a result of their discriminative properties. When the stimulus is paired with food, these discriminative properties sometime mask a reinforcement effect, and no change in response patterning is observed. When the discriminative properties of the brief stimulus are absent, the reinforcing effects of pairing the brief stimulus with food may be observed.     

Matching-to-sample accuracy on fixed-ratio schedules.

Pigeons performing on a matching-to-sample procedure were exposed to six fixed-ratio (FR) schedules (FR 1, 5, 10, 20, 40, and 60) of food reinforcement for correct matching responses. During both a correction and a noncorrection procedure without an intertrial interval (ITI), matching accuracy was lower on FR 1 and FR 60 than at intermediate ratios. With the FR 1 schedule, both a 5-sec and a 25-sec ITI resulted in higher matching accuracy than without an ITI; accuracy, with an ITI, was fairly constant for ratios of 1 to 20 but declined at higher ratios. The results suggest that the presence or absence of an ITI in matching to sample may account for inconsistencies obtained in earlier studies of the relationship of matching accuracy to ratio size.     

Reinforcement contingencies as discriminative stimuli: II. Effects of changes in stimulus probability.

Three pigeons were trained on a matching procedure involving a sample component and a choice component. Responding in the sample component, according to either a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule on some trials or a differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior schedule on other trials, produced access to the choice component in which each of two keys was illuminated with a unique color. The correct choice response was defined by the contingency that was met to produce the choice. The food hopper operated for 1.5 seconds following an appropriate sample response and for 3 seconds following a correct choice response. A signal-detection analysis showed that variations in the probability of presentation of the different contingencies systematically affected response bias but not sensitivity to the contingencies as stimuli. Substitution of a blackout for food at the end of the sample component did not differentially affect performance, but elimination of the delay between sample and choice components generally increased the sensitivity measure. The findings suggest a role for reinforcement contingency discrimination in schedule-controlled responding.