Variable-interval schedules of timeout from avoidance

Rats were trained on concurrent schedules in which pressing one lever postponed shock and pressing the other occasionally produced a 2-min timeout during which the shock-postponement schedule was suspended and its correlated stimuli were removed. Throughout, the shock-postponement schedule maintained proficient levels of avoidance. Nevertheless, in Experiment 1 responding on the timeout lever was established rapidly, was maintained at stable levels on variable-interval schedules, was extinguished by withholding timeout, was reestablished when timeout was reintroduced, and was brought under discriminative control with a multiple variable-interval extinction schedule of timeout. These results are in contrast with Verhave's (1962) conclusion that timeout is an ineffective reinforcer when presented to rats on intermittent schedules. In Experiment 2 the consequence of responding on the timeout lever was altered so that the shock-postponement schedule remained in effect even though the stimulus conditions associated with timeout were produced for 2 min. Responding extinguished, indicating that suspension of the shock-postponement schedule, not stimulus change, was the source of reinforcement. By establishing the reinforcing efficacy of timeout with standard variable-interval schedules, these experiments illustrate a procedure for studying negative reinforcement in the same way as positive reinforcement.     

Superstitious behavior in humans

Twenty undergraduate students were exposed to single response-independent schedules of reinforcer presentation, fixed-time or variable-time, each with values of 30 and 60 s. The reinforcer was a point on a counter accompanied by a red lamp and a brief buzzer. Three color signals were presented, without consistent relation to reinforcer or to the subjects' behavior. Three large levers were available, but the subjects were not asked to perform any particular behavior. Three of the 20 subjects developed persistent superstitious behavior. One engaged in a pattern of lever-pulling responses that consisted of long pulls after a few short pulls; the second touched many things in the experimental booth; the third showed biased responding called sensory superstition. However, most subjects did not show consistent superstitious behavior. Reinforcers can operate effectively on human behavior even in the absence of a response-reinforcer contingency and can, in some cases, shape stable superstitious patterns. However, superstitious behavior is not a consistent outcome of exposure of human subjects to response-independent reinforcer deliveries.     

Control of responding during stimuli that precede transitions in reinforcement frequency

Pigeons' responses were reinforced on a variant of a mixed variable-interval extinction schedule of reinforcement in which the transition to the higher reinforcement rate was signaled by a trace stimulus projected on the response key prior to the onset of the component correlated with food delivery. In the first of two experiments, the duration of the trace stimulus preceding the component correlated with food delivery was varied from 1.5 to 50.0 s and in the second experiment, the reinforcement frequency in the same component was varied from 10 to 60 reinforcers per hour. Pigeons pecked at the trace stimulus preceding the onset of the component correlated with food delivery even though responding was not reinforced in its presence and only one of the changes in reinforcement rate (i.e., from extinction to reinforcement) was signaled. The rate of pecking during the trace stimulus was a function of its duration but not of the reinforcement frequency in the following component. Higher rates generally occurred at the shorter trace-stimulus durations. Component responding following the offset of the trace stimulus was under discriminative control of the trace stimulus whether or not responding occurred in the presence of the trace stimulus.     

DOES EFFORT PLAY A ROLE IN THE EFFECT OF RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS ON DELAYED MATCHING TO SAMPLE?

The possible role of "effort" in the accuracy of pigeons' performance on a delayed matching-to-sample procedure was investigated by examining the effects of response requirements that accompanied a trial-initiating stimulus and that accompanied a sample stimulus. In the first experiment, the effect of varying the size of a fixed-ratio requirement for responses during an initiating stimulus was compared to that of varying a similar requirement for responses during the sample stimulus. Accuracy increased reliably with increases in the ratio scheduled during the sample stimulus, but was not significantly affected by increases in the ratio scheduled on the key during the initiating stimulus. In another phase of Experiment 1, sample duration was held constant while the ratio requirement was varied during the initiating stimulus. Again, accuracy of matching to sample was not significantly affected by the size of the ratio scheduled during the initiating stimulus. Experiment 2 provided a systematic replication of these results in another group of pigeons and included a more detailed analysis of responding. These results support the view that increases in sample-response requirement facilitate accuracy of delayed matching by increasing the durations of exposure to the sample stimuli, and do not support a role of effort in the sample-response effect. In Experiment 3, the facilitative effect of responses on the sample but not of those on the initiating stimulus was replicated using a simultaneous matching-to-sample procedure. This finding provides further evidence against an interpretation of response-requirement effects that appeals to effort; the finding also suggests that sample exposure might affect initial discrimination of the sample rather than remembering the sample.     

Superimposition of response-independent reinforcement

Studies that have superimposed response-independent reinforcement (or reinforcers scheduled by contingencies placed on the absence of responding) upon conventional response-dependent schedules are reviewed. In general, providing alternative sources of reinforcement reduced response rates below the levels observed when alternative reinforcement was absent. However, response-rate elevation was sometimes found, particularly when rates of superimposed response-independent reinforcement were low. Superimposition of schedules providing reinforcers contingent on the absence of responding usually produced more severe response-rate decrements than superimposition of response-independent reinforcement. A variant of Herrnstein's equation, which assumes that some of the alternative reinforcers function as if they were delivered by baseline response-dependent source of reinforcement, is in qualitative agreement with the overall body of results obtained, and can predict both increases and decreases in response rate as resulting from superimposed reinforcers.     

Auditory word discriminations in the pigeon.

Four pigeons were trained on a multiple variable-interval 30-s extinction schedule with various pairs of spoken English words presented as the discriminative stimuli. The birds typically produced discrimination indices of 70% to 90% accuracy. Discrimination accuracy was improved by shortening the interval between auditory stimulus presentations, and by increasing the number of syllables in the words.     

More on concurrent interval-ratio schedules: a replication and review.

It has been suggested that the failure to maximize reinforcement on concurrent variable-interval, variable-ratio schedules may be misleading. Inasmuch as response costs are not directly measured, it is possible that subjects are optimally balancing the benefits of reinforcement against the costs of responding. To evaluate this hypothesis, pigeons were tested in a procedure in which interval and ratio schedules had equal response costs. On a concurrent variable time (VT), variable ratio-time (VRT) schedule, the VT schedule runs throughout the session and the VRT schedule is controlled by responses to a changeover key that switches from one schedule to the other. Reinforcement is presented independent of response. This schedule retains the essential features of concurrent VI VR, but eliminates differential response costs for the two alternatives. It therefore also eliminates at least one significant ambiguity about the reinforcement maximizing performance. Pigeons did not maximize rate of reinforcement on this procedure. Instead, their times spent on the alternative schedules matched the relative rates of reinforcement, even when schedule parameters were such that matching earned the lowest possible overall rate of reinforcement. It was further shown that the observed matching was not a procedural artifact arising from the constraints built into the schedule.     

Drug-behavior interaction history: modification of the effects of morphine on punished behavior.

Squirrel monkeys were trained to respond under a multiple fixed-interval, fixed-interval schedule in which the first response after 5 min terminated a visual stimulus in the presence of which electric shocks could occur. During one component of the schedule, correlated with one color of stimulus lights, every 30th response also produced electric shock; responding was suppressed during this component to approximately 10 to 12% of that occurring in the alternate component in which responding was not punished. In contrast to previous research, morphine (0.03 to 1.0 mg/kg) increased punished responding. Unpunished responding, however, was either not affected or decreased at doses of morphine that increased punished responding. Increases in rate of punished responding also occurred when the single-schedule punishment condition was studied alone in these animals. Subsequent experimentation, which systematically analyzed the development of the rate-enhancing effects of morphine on punished responding, involved the study of drug effects in additional monkeys trained initially under a single-schedule punishment condition. The effects of morphine on punished responding were studied before, after, and then during exposure to the multiple schedule that included a component in which responding was not punished. Increases in response rate with morphine did not occur until it was administered during exposure to the multiple schedule that included a component in which responding was not punished. As with the other monkeys, once the rate increases in punished responding occurred under the multiple schedule, these effects of morphine persisted, even when the multiple schedule was removed.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Preference for less segmented fixed-time components in concurrent-chain schedules of reinforcement

A concurrent-chain procedure was used to examine choice between segmented and less segmented response-independent schedules of reinforcement. A pair of independent, concurrent variable-interval 60-s schedules were presented in the initial link, along with a 1.5-s changeover delay. A chained fixed-interval fixed-time and its corresponding tandem schedule constituted the terminal links. The length of the fixed-interval schedule in the terminal link was varied between 5 s and 30 s while that of the fixed-time schedule was kept at 5 s over conditions. The first components of both terminal-link schedules were accompanied by the same stimulus. Except in the baseline condition, the onset of the second component of the terminal-link chained schedule was accompanied by either a localized (key color) or a nonlocalized (dark houselight) stimulus change. Stimulus conditions were constant during the terminal-link tandem schedule. With three exceptions, pigeons demonstrated a slight preference for the tandem over the chained schedule in the terminal link. Furthermore, this preference varied inversely with the length of the first component. In general, these results are consistent with previous studies that reported an adverse effect on choice by segmenting an interval schedule into two or more components, but they are inconsistent with studies that reported preference for signaled over unsignaled delay of reinforcement.     

Behavior regulation and learned performance: Some misapprehensions and disagreements

The behavior-regulation approach to learned performance has been the subject of misapprehension and disagreement concerning: (1) the nature and importance of behavior regulation, (2) the definition and role of behavioral set-points, (3) the relation of optimal schedule performance to behavioral set-points, and (4) the question of whether deviations from total responding or from response patterns are the primary determinant of molar responding under schedule constraint. After clarifying the nature and role of behavior regulation and set-points, this paper shows that the data used to question optimal schedule performance (Allison, 1981a) actually strongly support the general behavior-regulation approach. These data also indicate a role for response-pattern set-points in determining schedule behavior, but contradict the hypothesis that deviations from response-pattern characteristics are the primary determinant of molar schedule effects.