Choice, time allocation, and response rate during stimulus generalization

Six pigeons were trained to discriminate between two noise intensities using a procedure that assessed choice, time allocation, and response rate simultaneously and independently. Responses on the left or right key (R1 or R2) were respectively correct in the presence of two different intensities, S1 and S2. After a correct response, reinforcement became available for pecks on the center key. Reinforcement density for R1¦S1 relative to R2¦S2 was varied across experimental conditions. Generalization tests followed extensive training at each condition. As a function of stimulus intensity, proportions of initial choices of R2, of time spent in R2-initiated components, and of center-key responses emitted in R2-initiated components all yielded sigmoidal gradients of similar slope, which shifted slightly in location when relative reinforcement density changed. Changeovers were maximal where initial choice proportions approximated 0.5. Gradients relating the absolute number of center-key responses to stimulus intensity were also roughly sigmoidal, but were more sensitive to changes in reinforcement density. Gradients of momentary response rate also depended on reinforcement density. During training, large but transitory shifts in choice responding occurred when reinforcement density changed, while differences in momentary response rate developed slowly, suggesting separate control of choice and response rate by the contingencies of reinforcement.     

Variability of response location on fixed-ratio and fixed-interval schedules of reinforcement

Variability of response location was studied in monkeys performing in a six-lever chamber. Fixed-ratio schedules, ranging from FR 1 to FR 300, generated a high degree of stereotypy of response location. In contrast, fixed-interval schedules of comparable reinforcement frequencies (0.06 to 4 minutes) generated much greater variability. These results failed to confirm any simple relationship between response variability and intermittence of reinforcement. Rather, variability seems to be determined by the particular characteristics of the reinforcement schedule.     

Presentation of Depression and Response to Group Cognitive Therapy with Older Patients

Concerned with response prediction, this research examines the relationships between pre-treatment components of depressive symptomatology and outcome of short-term group cognitive therapy for depression with older adults. Aspects of depressive symptomatology under examination were initial intensity of self-reported depressive symptomatology, profile of melancholic depression, perceived health status, perceived social support, and intensity of negative view of self. Findings indicate that perceived social support is not related to outcome but that a more intense depressive symptomatology, a more negative health evaluation, and a more negative view of self are variables associated with a less favorable outcome. Despite showing a sizable decrease in depressive symptoms over the course of intervention, severely depressed subjects still presented residual depressive symptoms at the conclusion of intervention. There was a tendency for subjects with a melancholic profile to show a poorer response to this intervention.     

Changes in a multiple-response repertoire during response-contingent punishment and response restriction: Sequential relationships

A multiple-response baseline of four activities was established using gerbils as subjects. When one of the baseline responses was punished (Experiment 1) or restricted (Experiments 2 and 3), only the most probable of the alternative baseline responses increased. The response most likely to follow the punished or restricted responses during baseline sessions was also suppressed during subsequent punishment or response-restriction treatment.     

An experimental analysis of the effects of d-amphetamine and cocaine on the acquisition and performance of response chains in monkeys.

In one component of a multiple schedule of food presentation, monkeys acquired a different four-response chain each session by responding sequentially on three keys in the presence of four geometric forms (learning). In the other component, the four-response chain was the same each session (performance). Both d-amphetamine and cocaine, at the higher doses, disrupted the behavior in the learning component; the overall response rate decreased, the overall accuracy was impaired (i.e., percent errors increased), and there was less within-session error reduction. The performance component was generally less sensitive than the learning component to the disruptive effects of both drugs on rate and accuracy. After pre-feeding or during an extended session, the response rate decreased in both components, but accuracy was generally unaffected. When the four discriminative stimuli in both components were removed, the behavior was disrupted to a greater extent in the performance component. The disruptive effects of both drugs on behavior in the learning component were attenuated when the drugs were administered during the session after the response chain had been acquired. It was concluded that the greater sensitivity of the learning component to disruptive drug effects is related to the relatively weak stimulus control and/or the lower rate of reinforcement associated with that component.     

The ADHD Response-Inhibition Deficit as Measured by the Stop Task: Replication with DSM–IV Combined Type, Extension, and Qualification

Although response inhibition has been proposed as a core element of child attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), the literature is heavily reliant on studies using DSM–III–R diagnostic criteria, older methods of measuring response inhibition, samples of boys, and failing to control thoroughly for comorbid problems—both as diagnoses and as subclinical variation. The present study replicated a deficit in response inhibition in the ADHD combined type (DSM–IV, American Psychiatric Association, 1994) using samples matched on age and sex. The study replicated an effect size of approximately d = .6 in boys with ADHD, and observed an even larger effect size for girls, although the Sex × Group interaction was nonsignificant. Children with ADHD also had problems with response output, shown by variable responding. Excluding comorbid conduct disorder, reading disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, obsessive–compulsive disorder, major depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder from the sample did not alter the results. Correlations indicated that response inhibition was associated with both attentional problems and reading level. Covarying for reading problems did not eliminate the ADHD group effect, but the association of response inhibition with reading clearly requires further examination. Overall, the study supported the role of response inhibition in the DSM–IV ADHD combined type, but with key qualifications as to degree of specificity in reference both to comorbid problems and other executive functions.     

A cost-benefit analysis of demand for food.

Laboratory studies of consumer demand theory require assumptions regarding the definition of price in the absence of a medium of exchange (money). In this study we test the proposition that the fundamental dimension of price is a cost-benefit ratio expressed as the effort expended per unit of food value consumed. Using rats as subjects, we tested the generality of this "unit price" concept by varying four dimensions of price: fixed-ratio schedule, number of food pellets per fixed-ratio completion, probability of reinforcement, and response lever weight or effort. Two levels of the last three factors were combined in a 2 x 2 x 2 design giving eight groups. Each group was studied under a series of six FR schedules. Using the nominal values of all factors to determine unit price, we found that grams of food consumed plotted as a function of unit price followed a single demand curve. Similarly, total work output (responses x effort) conformed to a single function when plotted in terms of unit price. These observations provided a template for interpreting the effects of biological factors, such as brain lesions or drugs, that might alter the cost-benefit ratio.     

Concurrent-schedule performance: Effects of relative and overall reinforcer rate

Six pigeons were trained to respond on two keys, each of which provided reinforcers on an arithmetic variable-interval schedule. These concurrent schedules ran nonindependently with a 2-s changeover delay. Six sets of conditions were conducted. Within each set of conditions the ratio of reinforcers available on the two alternatives was varied, but the arranged overall reinforcer rate remained constant. Each set of conditions used a different overall reinforcer rate, ranging from 0.22 reinforcers per minute to 10 reinforcers per minute. The generalized matching law fit the data from each set of conditions, but sensitivity to reinforcer frequency (a) decreased as the overall reinforcer rate decreased for both time allocation and response allocation based analyses of the data. Overall response rates did not vary with changes in relative reinforcer rate, but decreased with decreases in overall reinforcer rate. Changeover rates varied as a function of both relative and overall reinforcer rates. However, as explanations based on changeover rate seem unable to deal with the changes in generalized matching sensitivity, discrimination accounts of choice may offer a more promising interpretation.     

Competitive fixed-interval performance in humans

Two persons responded in the same session in separate cubicles, but under a single schedule of reinforcement. Each time reinforcement was programmed, only the first response to occur, that is, the response of only one of the subjects, was reinforced. “Competitive” behavior that developed under these conditions was examined in three experiments. In Experiment 1 subjects responded under fixed-interval (FI) 30-s, 60-s, and 90-s schedules of reinforcement. Under the competition condition, relative to baseline conditions, the response rates were higher and the pattern was “break-and-run.” In Experiment 2, subjects were exposed first to a conventional FI schedule and then to an FI competition schedule. Next, they were trained to respond under either a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) or fixed-ratio (FR) schedule, and finally, the initial FI competition condition was reinstated. In this second exposure to the FI competition procedure, DRL subjects responded at lower rates than were emitted during the initial exposure to that condition and FR subjects responded at higher rates. For all subjects, however, responding gradually returned to the break-and-run pattern that had occurred during the first FI competition condition. Experiment 3 assessed potential variables contributing to the effects of the competitive FI contingencies during Experiments 1 and 2. Subjects were exposed to FI schedules where (a) probability of reinforcement at completion of each fixed interval was varied, or (b) a limited hold was in effect for reinforcement. Only under the limited hold was responding similar to that observed in previous experiments.     

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.