Handling time and choice in pigeons

According to optimal foraging theory, animals should prefer food items with the highest ratios of energy intake to handling time. When single items have negligible handling times, one large item should be preferred to a collection of small ones of equivalent total weight. However, when pigeons were offered such a choice on equal concurrent variable-interval schedules in a shuttlebox, they preferred the side offering many small items per reinforcement to that offering one or a few relatively large items. This preference was still evident on concurrent fixed-cumulative-duration schedules in which choosing the alternative with longer handling time substantially lowered the rate of food intake.     

Temporal proximity and reinforcement sensitivity in multiple schedules

Distributions of reinforcers between two components of multiple variable-interval schedules were varied over a number of conditions. Sensitivity to reinforcement, measured by the exponent of the power function relating ratios of responses in the two components to ratios of reinforcers obtained in the components, did not differ between conditions with 15-s or 60-s component durations. The failure to demonstrate the “short-component effect,” where sensitivity is high for short components, was consistent with reanalysis of previous data. With 60-s components, sensitivity to reinforcement decreased systematically with time since component alternation, and was higher in the first 15-s subinterval of the 60-s component than for the component whose total duration was 15 s. Varying component duration and sampling behavior at different times since component transition may not be equivalent ways of examining the effects of average temporal distance between components.     

Concurrent access to two concentrations of orally delivered phencyclidine: effects of feeding conditions.

Two experiments addressed the effects of food satiation and deprivation on oral self-administration of two concurrently available phencyclidine concentrations. In the first experiment, 8 rhesus monkeys self-administered either of two concentrations of phencyclidine ("PCP, angel dust") and water under concurrent fixed-ratio 16 schedules. One concentration was always held constant (0.25 mg/mL) while a series of other phencyclidine concentrations, ranging from 0 (water) to 1.0 mg/mL, was presented in a nonsystematic order. Initially the monkeys were tested while food satiated, and the procedure was then repeated during food deprivation. The monkeys usually selected the higher concentration within the first few minutes of the session, indicating that taste and/or other immediate postingestional effects were important factors. Contrary to a number of previous reports, there were no consistent differences across subjects in the mean number of liquid deliveries or mean drug intake (mg/kg) during food satiation and deprivation. However, for all monkeys the within-session time course of responding during food satiation consistently differed from that during deprivation. A second experiment assessed whether the failure to find consistent differences in drug intake during food satiation and deprivation had been due to the history of concurrent access to different phencyclidine concentrations or to the extended experience with phencyclidine under food-satiation conditions. Six additional monkeys (Group 2) were exposed to the phencyclidine self-administration procedure (during food satiation and deprivation) for the same length of time as the monkeys in Experiment 1 (Group 1), except they received only concurrent access to phencyclidine (0.25 mg/mL) and water. Both groups then received concurrent access to phencyclidine and water during five repeated cycles of food deprivation and satiation. There were also marked individual differences in Group 2: During food satiation, 2 of the monkeys' responding increased, 1 showed no change, and 3 decreased. Examination of a number of historical variables indicated that the greater the percentage of total sessions spent during food satiation with phencyclidine available (before these experiments began), the greater the amounts of phencyclidine consumed during food satiation and the smaller the differences in phencyclidine intake when the two feeding conditions were compared.     

Choice between reliable and unreliable outcomes: mixed percentage-reinforcement in concurrent chains.

Pigeons' choices between alternatives that provided different percentages of reinforcement in mixed schedules were studied using the concurrent-chains procedure. In Experiment 1, the alternatives were terminal-link schedules that were equal in delay and magnitude of reinforcement, but that provided different percentages of reinforcement, with one schedule providing, reinforcement twice as reliably as the other. All pigeons preferred the more reliable schedule, and their level of preference was not systematically affected by variation in the absolute percentage values, or in the magnitude of reinforcement. In Experiment 2, preference for a schedule providing 100% reinforcement over one providing 33% reinforcement increased systematically with increases in the duration of the terminal links. In contrast, preference decreased systematically with increases in the duration of the initial links. Experiment 3 examined choice with equal percentages of reinforcement but unequal delays to reinforcement. Preference for the shorter delay to reinforcement was not systematically affected by variation in the absolute percentage of reinforcement. The overall pattern of results supported predictions based on an extension of the delay-reduction hypothesis to choice procedures involving mixed schedules of percentage reinforcement.     

Effects of delayed conditioned reinforcement in chain schedules.

The contingency between responding and stimulus change on a chain variable-interval 33-s, variable-interval 33-s, variable-interval 33-s schedule was weakened by interposing 3-s delays between either the first and second or the second and third links. No stimulus change signaled the delay interval and responses could occur during it, so the obtained delays were often shorter than the scheduled delay. When the delay occurred after the initial link, initial-link response rates decreased by an average of 77% with no systematic change in response rates in the second or third links. Response rates in the second link decreased an average of 59% when the delay followed that link, again with little effect on response rates in the first or third links. Because the effect of delaying stimulus change was comparable to the effect of delaying primary reinforcement in a simple variable-interval schedule, and the effect of the unsignaled delay was specific to the link in which the delay occurred, the results provide strong evidence for the concept of conditioned reinforcement.     

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.     

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.