Multiple determinants of the effects of reinforcement magnitude on free-operant response rates

Four experiments examined the effects of increasing the number of food pellets given to hungry rats for a lever-press response. On a simple variable-interval 60-s schedule, increased number of pellets depressed response rates (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2, the decrease in response rate as a function of increased reinforcement magnitude was demonstrated on a variable-interval 30-s schedule, but enhanced rates of response were obtained with the same increase in reinforcement magnitude on a variable-ratio 30 schedule. In Experiment 3, higher rates of responding were maintained by the component of a concurrent variable-interval 60-s variable-interval 60-s schedule associated with a higher reinforcement magnitude. In Experiment 4, higher rates of response were produced in the component of a multiple variable-interval 60-s variable-interval 60-s schedule associated with the higher reinforcement magnitude. It is suggested that on simple schedules greater reinforcer magnitudes shape the reinforced pattern of responding more effectively than do smaller reinforcement magnitudes. This effect is, however, overridden by another process, such a contrast, when two magnitudes are presented within a single session on two-component schedules.     

Local contrast in behavior allocation during multiple-schedule components

Allocation of responses between two keys was studied during two alternating multiple-schedule components. Responses were recorded in successive quarters of each component. Variable-interval reinforcer schedules on the two keys were constant throughout the experiment for one (constant) component and were varied over conditions on one key for the other, producing changes in reinforcer ratios for the varied component. Behavior allocation for the first quarter of the constant component was inversely related to varied-component reinforcer ratios, a form of local contrast, but this relationship was not observed later in the component. During the first quarter of the varied component, slopes of matching lines were high and decreased later in the component. It is argued that this form of local contrast cannot be explained in terms of reallocation of extraneous reinforcers between components, and that the matching law for concurrent operants does not capture some sources of control over behavior allocation. A simple extension of the matching law is offered that adequately describes behavior changes during both components. A version of this formulation can predict contrast effects in absolute response rates.     

A re-examination of local contrast in multiple schedules

Pigeons were presented with multiple schedules of alternating 90-sec components. When components in which grain was never presented alternated with components in which grain was presented on a variable-interval schedule, the average rate of responding in the variable-interval components increased, showing overall positive behavioral contrast. Unlike previous reports, this study found that the response rates for all birds increased toward the end of the variable-interval components as training proceeded. This increase in local response rate disappeared when the multiple schedule was composed solely of variable-interval components and reappeared when the variable-interval components were again alternated with extinction. This finding cannot be predicted or explained by recent theories of behavioral contrast based on autoshaping, and thus questions their sufficiency. We suggest that this local response-rate increase results from the predictable change from high to low density of reinforcement at the end of the fixed-duration component. Thus, the present effect apparently illustrates a different type of interaction between components of a multiple schedule than that described by previous theories of contrast. In a given procedure, either or both types of interaction may occur; neither provides a complete account of behavioral contrast.     

Behaviors observed during S- in a simple discrimination learning task

Key pecking of pigeons was reinforced with food in the presence of a horizontal line and never reinforced in the presence of a vertical line. Highly stereotyped behaviors, as well as key pecking, were observed and recorded in the presence of both stimuli. Results showed that a high proportion of time spent in the presence of the horizontal line was occupied by key pecking, a high proportion of time in the presence of the vertical line was occupied by stereotyped nonkey-pecking behaviors, and intermediate proportions of time spent in the presence of intermediate stimuli were occupied by each class of behavior during generalization tests. Similar running rates (number of key pecks divided by observed key-pecking time) were obtained in the presence of all stimuli, indicating that changes in time rather than tempo accounted for the changes in overall rates of key pecking. An exception occurred in responding to the horizontal line as differential performance was developing. In addition to an increase in time spent key pecking, increased running rates occurred in seven of eight birds, suggesting that both time allocation and tempo play a role in behavioral contrast of overall rates of key pecking.     

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.     

Contrast effects in multiple fixed-interval reinforcement schedules

Pigeons were exposed to a multiple fixed-interval one-minute fixed-interval three-minute schedule of reinforcement following training on either a multiple fixed-interval one-minute fixed-interval one-minute schedule or a multiple fixed-interval three-minute fixed-interval three-minute schedule. For all birds, large negative local contrast effects developed during the first of four three-minute intervals in a component; response rate was depressed and postreinforcement pause lengthened in this interval. Positive local contrast effects were evident during the first of 12 one-minute intervals in a component for five of six birds; at asymptote, the pause was very short and response rate slightly elevated during this interval. Overall positive contrast was generally transient and varied considerably across subjects, while overall negative contrast effects, if they occurred, appeared only after a large number of sessions.     

Matching, contrast, and equalizing in the concurrent lever-press responding of rats

Five rats pressed levers for food reinforces delivered by several concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules. The rate of reinforcement available for responding on one component schedule was held constant at 60 reinforcers per hour. The rate of reinforcement available for responding on the other schedule varied from 30 to 240 reinforcers per hour. The behavior of the rats resembled the behavior of pigeons pecking keys for food reinforcers. The ratio of the overall rates of responding emitted under, and the ratio of the time spent responding under, the two components of each concurrent schedule were approximately equal to the ratio of the overall rates of reinforcement obtained from the components. The overall rate of responding emitted under, and the time spent responding under, the variable component schedule varied directly with the overall rate of reinforcement from that schedule. The overall rate of responding emitted under, and the time spent responding under, the constant component schedule varied inversely with the overall rate of reinforcement obtained from the variable component. The local rates of responding emitted under, and the local rates of reinforcement obtained from, the two components did not differ consistently across subjects. But they were not exactly equal either.     

Positive conditioned suppression: an explanation in terms of multiple and concurrent schedules

Rats performed under a baseline variable-interval schedule of food presentation. A response-independent food schedule was then superimposed on the baseline schedule for different periods of time across different conditions. The response-independent schedule operated for the whole session in some conditions, intermittently for sixty second periods in some, and intermittently for ten-second periods in others. Under these latter two sets of conditions, the response-independent food schedule was stimulus correlated and alternated with the baseline schedule according to a multiple schedule. Response-independent food presentations always suppressed responding. The degree of suppression tended to increase the longer the period of response-independent food. Control conditions, in which the superimposed schedule was response-dependent, rather than response-independent, did not produce response suppression. The results fit an analysis of positive conditioned suppression phenomena in the context of multiple and concurrent schedule effects.     

Single, but not multiple pairings of sucrose and corticosterone enhance memory for sucrose drinking and amplify remote reward relativity effects

This study tested whether pre-training pairings of ingestion of a 32% sucrose solution and injection(s) of corticosterone (B) would enhance later ingestion in the absence of B, and whether these effects would carry over into later contrast-like effects when animals were subsequently shifted to 4% sucrose. Frequency-dependence of these pairings was also examined. Three groups of male Sprague-Dawley rats were adrenalectomized (ADX). A fourth group was sham ADX. Each ADX group received three presentations of sucrose and B (666 microg/kg, s.c.). One received unpaired presentations (separated by days), one received two unpaired presentations and one paired (i.e., simultaneous) presentation, and one received three paired presentations. Shams received three sucrose presentations paired with saline. Single, but not multiple pairings of B with ingestion of a 32% sucrose solution enhanced later sucrose ingestion, a memorial-like effect that carried over into later, opposite contrast-like effects upon presentation of a less-preferred 4% sucrose solution. These effects could not be easily ascribed to differences in training, other than the pairing regimen itself, nor to motivational differences at the time of testing, and were presumed to be memorial. The pairing and frequency-dependence of these appetitive phenomena are analogous to what is frequently observed during acute or chronic exposure to aversive situations and/or neuromodulatory stress hormones, in terms of their bidirectional effects on memory. Through effects on memory, stress hormones may modulate reward and reward relativity.     

Habituation To The Reinforcer May Contribute To Multiple-schedule Behavioral Contrast

Habituation to the reinforcer may contribute to multiple-schedule behavioral contrast. According to this argument, reducing reinforcers in one component of a multiple schedule reduces habituation to the reinforcer. Reducing habituation enhances the value, or effectiveness, of the remaining reinforcers, producing positive contrast. Enriching the reinforcers in one component increases habituation to that reinforcer. Increasing habituation decreases the effectiveness of the reinforcer, producing negative contrast. Such an idea is simple and parsimonious. It is not contradicted by any well-established finding in the contrast literature. It makes several tested and untested predictions that are unusual. However, habituation cannot explain all contrast. A complete explanation requires postulating that at least one additional mechanism, controlled by the conditions of reinforcement in the following component, also contributes to contrast.