THE ROLE OF FEEDBACK IN VOLUNTARY CONTROL OF BLOOD PRESSURE IN INSTRUCTED SUBJECTS1

Forty normal male volunteers were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions and instructed to raise and lower their systolic blood pressure. Subjects received either beat-to-beat feedback contingent on pressure changes, noncontingent beat-to-beat feedback, noncontingent feedback presented randomly with respect to the occurrence of each heart beat, or instructions alone. The order of increase and decrease trial blocks was counterbalanced across groups. Subjects receiving contingent feedback were monetarily rewarded for appropriate pressure changes. Subjects receiving noncontingent feedback received rewards and feedback equal to the mean received by the contingent group. Subjects in the instructions-only condition were also paid this bonus but were informed of their earnings only at the conclusion of the experiment. Results indicated that in the presence of instructions, feedback, whether contingent or noncontingent, added little to subjects' ability to control pressure during a single session. Theoretical and clinical implications are discussed.     

TWO-TO-ONE versus ONE-TO-ONE STUDENT-TEACHER RATIOS IN THE OPERANT VERBAL TRAINING OF RETARDED CHILDREN1

The operant training of two retarded children simultaneously on a picture-naming task was investigated as an alternative to the more commonly reported one-to-one student-teacher ratio. In Experiment I, two conditions were compared in which the children received primary reinforcement on a fixed-ratio schedule for responding correctly on prompt and probe trials in a standardized picture-naming procedure. During the “Group Condition”, the experimenter alternated from one child to the other after each primary reinforcement, after each incorrect response, after each response omission, and after each 10-sec period in which a child did not “attend” (by making a trial-initiating response) when it was his or her turn to be worked with. During the “Individual Condition”, the experimenter worked with only one child, and presented trials whenever the child made attending responses. Experiment I demonstrated that the Group Condition was more efficient than the Individual Condition in terms of total correct responses and total pictures learned per unit of training time. Incidental learning was also found in that the children learned some of each others' pictures as well as their own, thus indicating a further advantage of the larger student-teacher ratio. In Experiment II, an attempt was made to equate the two conditions, except for the presence of two children in the Group Condition, by ignoring the child in the Individual Condition for brief periods equal to those that occurred in the Group Condition when the experimenter presented training trials to the other child. The results demonstrated that the greater efficiency of the Group Condition was not due to the manner in which training time was allocated to the two members of a group. It also replicated the finding that the children learned some of each others' words in the Group Condition.     

Effects of fixed-ratio sample and choice response requirements upon oddity matching

Three pigeons were trained on oddity matching in which either 1, 4, 8, 16, or 32 sample-key observing responses were required to turn off the sample stimuli and turn on the comparison stimuli. Oddity accuracy increased when the observing-response requirement was raised and decreased when the requirement was lowered. Next, while the observing requirement was maintained at one response, the number of responses required to the comparison stimuli was either 1, 4, 8, 16, or 32. Under these conditions, choice was defined as the comparison that first accumulated the required number of responses. In general, increasing the comparison-response requirement decreased accuracy and lowering the comparison requirement increased accuracy. The fixed-ratio observing requirements appeared to facilitate control by stimuli serving an instructional function.     

On Herrnstein's equation and related forms

In 1970, Herrnstein proposed a simple equation to describe the relation between response and reinforcement rates on interval schedules. Its empirical basis is firm, but its theoretical foundation is still uncertain. Two approaches to the derivation of Herrnstein's equation are discussed. It can be derived as the equilibrium solution to a process model equivalent to familiar linear-operator learning models. Modifications of this approach yield competing power-function formulations. The equation can also be derived from the assumption that response strength is proportional to reinforcement rate, given that there is a ceiling on response rate. The proportional relation can, in turn, be derived from a threshold assumption equivalent to Shimp's “momentary maximizing”. This derivation implies that the two parameters of Herrnstein's equation should be correlated, and may explain its special utility in application to internal schedules.     

Self-reinforcement

Self-reinforcement in operant situations generally refers to those arrangements in which the subject delivers to himself a consequence, contingent on his behavior. However, it is noted that the definition of all other types of reinforcement make its delivery contingent on the subject's behavior. What is actually at issue is the agent who defines whether or not the response required for reinforcement has been met. In self-reinforcement, the subject himself defines this. In the laboratory, this requirement is machine-defined; in school examinations, it is teacher-defined; and in many clinical self-control situations, it is also independently defined. A reinforcement contingency presupposes such independence, absent in self-reinforcement. Implications for research and practice are discussed and alternative formulations are offered.     

Precriterion stationarity in markovian learning models

Two forms of stationarity prior to criterion in absorbing Markov chains are examined. Both forms require that the probability of a particular response on a particular trial before absorption be independent of trial number. The stronger of these forms holds that this is true independent of starting state; the weaker, only for a specified set of starting probabilities. Simple, necessary and sufficient conditions for both forms are developed and applied to several examples.The author would like to thank Charles Lewis for his help in developing this article, and Peter Polson of the University of Colorado and an anonymous referee for several fruitful suggestions made in reviews of earlier versions.     

The stages of acquisition in stimulus fading

Pigeons were exposed to a stimulus fading procedure in which control of responding was transferred from red and black stimuli to lines of different angular orientation. After superimposing one line on the red stimulus and the other line on the black stimulus, the intensity of the lines was gradually increased and that of the red stimulus was gradually reduced. Probes consisting of red and line stimuli presented separately were used during the course of fading to assess control exerted by each element of the compound. As the lines were faded in, they did not acquire control of responding. As red was faded out, control of responding was acquired first by the lower intensity red stimuli in combination with the line stimulus, and finally by the angular orientation of the lines. Probes also determined the point at which the line stimuli, presented alone, would maintain a high degree of stimulus control. The results demonstrated that new stimuli in fading acquire dimensional control of responding in two sequential stages. Acquisition of stimulus control in fading was explained in terms of attenuation of stimulus blocking.