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.     

Temporal control by signals of interval duration within variable-interval schedules

Rats' lever pressing produced sucrose reinforcers on a variable-interval schedule where, in different conditions, the duration of a stimulus presented immediately after reinforcement was either correlated or uncorrelated with the duration of the current interreinforcement interval. Under the baseline schedule, in which no stimulus was presented, the minimum interreinforcement interval was 8 s and the mean postreinforcement pause of each subject approximated this value. Response rates increased slowly over the first 10 to 15 s and then remained roughly constant throughout the remainder of the interval. In both the correlated and uncorrelated conditions, the added stimulus resulted in the postreinforcement pauses lengthening to values in excess of the duration of the preceding stimulus. This resulted in a poststimulus pause which was, in most cases, roughly constant irrespective of the duration of the preceding stimulus, or of the reinforcement contingencies prevailing immediately after stimulus offset. Local response-rate patterns in the uncorrelated conditions were similar to those obtained under the baseline schedule in which no stimulus was presented. However, in the correlated condition local response rates increased across the remainder of the interreinforcer interval. Further, the rate of acceleration was inversely related to the duration of the preceding stimulus. These results show that a correlation between stimulus duration and the ensuing time to reinforcement can control behavior—a type of temporal control not previously reported.     

INCREASING APPOINTMENT KEEPING BY REDUCING THE CALL-APPOINTMENT INTERVAL

We examined the effect of reducing the interval between a patient's call for an appointment and the appointment itself. In Experiment 1, patients calling a family planning unit of a public health department were assigned appointments within either 1 or 3 weeks of their call. Data on patient “shows” and “no-shows” were recorded weekly for 6 weeks. Show rates for those in the 1-week appointment group were significantly higher than those in the 3-week group. In Experiment 2, patients were assigned to appointment dates either the next operating clinic day (next-day group) or 2 weeks from the call date (2-week group). Show rates for those in the next-day group were significantly better than show rates for patients in the 2-week group. Clinic productivity, time spent with patients, and consumer satisfaction were also assessed. Implications for appointment scheduling are discussed.     

Delay reduction: current status.

Delay-reduction theory states that the effectiveness of a stimulus as a conditioned reinforcer may be predicted most accurately by the reduction in time to primary reinforcement correlated with its onset. We review support for the theory and then discuss two new types of experiments that assess it. One compares models of choice in situations wherein the less preferred outcome is made more accessible; the other investigates whether frequency of conditioned reinforcement affects choice beyond the effect exerted by frequency of primary reinforcement.     

Momentary maximizing in concurrent schedules with a minimum interchangeover interval

Eight pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules with a minimum interchangeover time programmed as a consequence of changeovers. In Experiment 1 the reinforcement schedules remained constant while the minimum interchangeover time varied from 0 to 200 s. Relative response rates and relative time deviated from relative reinforcement rates toward indifference with long minimum interchangeover times. In Experiment 2 different reinforcement ratios were scheduled in successive experimental conditions with the minimum interchangeover time constant at 0, 2, 10, or 120 s. The exponent of the generalized matching equation was close to 1.0 when the minimum interchangeover time was 0 s (the typical procedure for concurrent schedules without a changeover delay) and decreased as that duration was increased. The data support the momentary maximizing theory and contradict molar maximizing theories and the melioration theory.     

TEMPORAL CONTROL ON INTERVAL SCHEDULES: WHAT DETERMINES THE POSTREINFORCEMENT PAUSE?

On fixed-interval or response-initiated delay schedules of reinforcement, the average pause following food presentation is proportional to the interfood interval. Moreover, when a number of intervals of different durations occur in a programmed cyclic series, postreinforcement pauses track the changes in interval value. What controls the duration of postreinforcement pauses under these conditions? Staddon, Wynne, and Higa (1991), in their linear waiting model, propose control by the preceding interfood interval. Another possibility is that delay to reinforcement, signaled by a key peck and/or stimulus change, determines the subsequent pause. The experiments reported here examined the role of these two possible time markers by studying the performance of pigeons under a chained cyclic fixed-interval procedure. The data support the linear waiting model, but suggest that more than the immediately preceding interfood interval plays a role in temporal control.     

The asymptotic posterior normality of the latent trait in an IRT model

It has long been part of the item response theory (IRT) folklore that under the usual empirical Bayes unidimensional IRT modeling approach, the posterior distribution of examinee ability given test response is approximately normal for a long test. Under very general and nonrestrictive nonparametric assumptions, we make this claim rigorous for a broad class of latent models.This research was partially supported by Office of Naval Research Cognitive and Neural Sciences Grant N0014-J-90-1940, 442-1548, National Science Foundation Mathematics Grant NSF-DMS-91-01436, and the National Center for Supercomputing Applications. We wish to thank Kumar Joag-dev and Zhiliang Ying for enlightening suggestions concerning the proof of the basic result.The authors wish to thank Kumar Joag-Dev, Brian Junker, Bert Green, Paul Holland, Robert Mislevy, and especially Zhiliang Ying for their useful comments and discussions.