The transfer of respondent eliciting and extinction functions through stimulus equivalence classes

Two studies investigated the transfer of respondent elicitation through equivalence classes. In Experiment 1, match-to-sample procedures were used to teach 8 subjects two four-member equivalence classes. One member of one class was then paired with electric shock, and one member of the other class was presented without shock. All remaining stimuli were then presented. Using skin conductance as the measure of conditioning, transfer of conditioning was demonstrated in 6 of the 8 subjects. In Experiment 2, similar procedures were used to replicate the results of Experiment 1 and investigate the transfer of extinction. Following equivalence training and conditioning to all members of one class, one member was then presented in extinction. When the remaining stimuli from this class were then presented, they failed to elicit skin conductance. In the final phase of the experiment, the stimulus that was previously presented in extinction was reconditioned. Test trials with other members of the class revealed that they regained elicitation function. These results demonstrate that both respondent elicitation and extinction can transfer through stimulus classes. The clinical and applied significance of the results is discussed.     

Varying the temporal placement of a drinking opportunity in a fixed-interval schedule.

Three rats, lever pressing for food delivered on a fixed-interval 128-s schedule, were presented with a 16-s opportunity to drink from a retractable water source. The temporal placement of the water probe within the reinforcement cycle was varied sequentially, in steps of 16 s. Although the lever-pressing pattern was modulated by the intercalated water probe, water consumption during the probe itself was a decreasing function of time from the following reinforcer. These results were interpreted as evidence against the notion that schedule-induced drinking is a "ubiquitous" phenomenon and are congruent with results from other "intruded stimulus" experiments.     

Discrimination of methadone and cocaine by pigeons without explicit discrimination training.

Pigeons were trained to peck a key on a variable-interval 2-min schedule of food reinforcement. Prior to each session, either 2.0 mg/kg methadone (n = 3), 3.0 mg/kg cocaine (n = 4), or 5.6 mg/kg cocaine (n = 2) was administered. When each pigeon's rate of pecking was stable, a range of doses of the training drug and saline were administered prior to 20-min extinction sessions separated by at least four training sessions. Rate of pecking during these extinction tests was generally an increasing function of dose, with the lowest rates obtained following saline and low doses and the highest rates obtained following doses near the training doses. Dose functions from pigeons trained with 5.6 mg/kg cocaine were steeper than those from pigeons trained with 3.0 mg/kg cocaine. Pigeons trained with methadone or 3.0 mg/kg cocaine were then given discrimination training, in which food reinforcement followed drug administration and 20-min extinction sessions followed saline administration. Rates of pecking under these conditions quickly diverged until near-zero rates were obtained following saline and high rates were obtained following drug. Discrimination training steepened dose functions for the training drugs, and the effects of several other substituted drugs depended on the pharmacology of the training drug. The pigeons trained with 5.6 mg/kg cocaine were tested with d-amphetamine, methadone, and morphine prior to discrimination training. d-Amphetamine increased rates dose dependently, and methadone and morphine did not. The results suggest that discriminative control by methadone and cocaine was established without explicit discrimination training.     

A comparison of multiple versus single examples of the correct stimulus on task acquisition and generalization by persons with developmental disabilities

In teaching discriminations to persons with retardation, we often presume we will improve acquisition and generalization if we use multiple examples of boththe correct and incorrect stimuli. Two experiments were conducted to test this hypothesis. In the first experiment, 7 persons with moderate retardation learned to discriminate between functional words under two conditions. In one condition, Multiple Example of S- Only,1 example of the correct stimulus (S+) and 10 examples of the incorrect stimulus (S-) were used during acquisition. In the other condition, Multiple Examples of S+ and S-,10 examples of the S+ and 10 examples of the S- were used. Results showed that the condition which presented only a single example of S+ was superior 16 times and inferior 4 times during acquisition, generalization, and maintenance. A second experiment was conducted to (a) replicate the methodology and procedures in Experiment 1 with different participants, (b) determine whether the results were replicable, and (c) obtain efficiency data. Results replicated the findings of the first experiment. The condition which presented only a single example of S+ was superior on measures of (a) trials to criterion, (b) percent correct during acquisition, and (c) minutes to criterion. On measures of generalization, the two conditions were relatively equal. Thus, the condition which presented only a single example of the correct stimulus was more efficient and was just as effective in generalization as the condition which presented multiple examples of both the S+ and S-. These surprising results were discussed in terms of stimulus control, why students performed just as well during generalization when only one example of the S+ was used, why acquisition was also poorer for this condition, and how future studies might address these points.     

Interactions in multiple schedules: negative induction with squirrel monkeys

In Experiment I, lever pressing by squirrel monkeys was maintained under a sequence of variable-interval, multiple variable-interval variable-interval, and multiple variable-interval extinction schedules of food presentation. Negative induction (decreased responding in the unchanged component) occurred when one component of the multiple variable-interval variable-interval schedule was changed to extinction. Negative induction was transient over sessions; responding in the unchanged component usually recovered to a rate similar to that under the multiple variable-interval variable-interval schedule. Negative induction was not accompanied by consistent changes in the patterns of local responding within the unchanged component, and did not depend on whether component schedules were associated with localized (lever lights) or diffuse visual stimuli (houselights), or on whether the unchanged component was a 60- or 180-sec variable-interval schedule. In Experiment II, responding was maintained under a sequence of variable-interval and multiple variable-interval timeout schedules of food presentation. Negative induction occurred when responding declined gradually in the timeout component but not when responding declined abruptly. The nature of interactions in multiple schedules may depend on the species; negative induction was observed with squirrel monkeys under conditions similar to those that produce positive contrast with pigeons.     

Reaction times of pigeons on a wavelength discrimination task

After extensive pretraining, three pigeons were exposed in 2-second trials to a random series of 14 light wavelengths, ranging in one nanometer (nm) steps from 575 nanometers to 589 nanometers. Responses to one of the wavelengths, 582 nanometers, were intermittently reinforced. The relative frequency of response approached 1.0 at 582 nanometers, and decreased with progressively higher and lower wavelengths. Reaction times shorter than about 0.2 second occurred with a low frequency that was largely independent of wavelength. Wavelength controlled the frequency of longer reaction times, but did not affect the distribution of these reaction times. Consequently, receiver-operating characteristic curves constructed by using reaction time as a rating measure did not conform to the signal-detection model, in contrast to such conformity when response rate is used in a similar way. The data suggest that stimulus onset as such triggers early response emission with some small probability; the probability of responses with longer latency is controlled by wavelength, but their time of emission is controlled by some independent process.     

Effects of component length and of the transitions among components in multiple schedules

Pigeons received equal variable-interval reinforcement during presentations of two line-orientation stimuli while five other orientations appeared in extinction. Component duration was 30 seconds for all orientations and the sequence was arranged so that each orientation preceded itself and each other orientation equally often. The duration of one component (0°) was shortened to 10 seconds and the other (90°) was lengthened to 50 seconds. All animals showed large increases in response rate in the shortened component and this increase was recoverable after an interpolated condition in which all components were again 30 seconds in duration. This effect was replicated in a second experiment in which component duration was changed from 150 seconds to 50 seconds and 250 seconds. An examination of local contrast effects during the first experiment showed that the shortened component produced local contrast during subsequent presentations of the lengthened component, just as would a component associated with more frequent reinforcement. When the presentation sequence was changed so that the lengthened component was always followed by the shortened component, response rates generally increased during the lengthened component. When the sequence was arranged so that the shortened component always preceded the longer component, response rate decreased in the former. These effects, as well as the increases in response rate following change in component length, seem not to be the product of local contrast effects among components.     

Behavioral contrast as differential time allocation

In Experiment I, hooded rats were exposed to multiple variable-interval schedules of reinforcement in which manipulanda and reinforcement magazines at opposite ends of the experimental chamber were associated with the different components. Time allocated to each component was measured by recording the time spent by the subject in the appropriate half of the chamber. Positive behavioral contrast was observed for the comparison between multiple variable-interval 30-second variable-interval 30-second and multiple variable-interval 30-second variable-interval 90-second conditions for both response frequency and time allocation measures, but not for mean local response rate (response frequency per time allocated to a component). In Experiment II, rats were exposed to multiple variable-time schedules in which reinforcement was response independent. Time allocated to each component was measured for two conditions, multiple variable-time 30-second variable-time 30-second and multiple variable-time 30-second variable-time 90-second. Positive behavioral contrast of time allocation was exhibited. The results indicated that time allocation was differentially sensitive to changes in reinforcement probability, and that behavioral contrast may result from the differential allocation of time to the different components of the multiple schedule.     

The effects of different component response requirements in multiple and concurrent schedules

Six pigeons were trained on multiple and concurrent schedules. The reinforcement rates were varied systematically (a) when lever pressing was required in one component and key pecking in the successive component; (b) when lever pressing was required in both multiple components; (c) when key pecking was required in both multiple components; and (d) when key pecking was required on one schedule and lever pressing was required on the concurrently-available schedule. Only the absolute level of responding was changed by different response requirements. Analyzed by the generalized matching law, performance under different response requirements resulted in a bias toward key pecking, and the measured response bias was the same in multiple and concurrent schedule arrangements. The bias in time measures obtained from concurrent schedule performance was reliably smaller than the obtained response biases. The sensitivity to reinforcement-rate changes was ordered: concurrent key-lever; multiple key-key; multiple lever-key; and, the least sensitive, multiple lever-lever. The results confirm that requirements of different topographical responses can be handled by the generalized matching law mainly in the bias parameter, but problems for this type of analysis may be caused by the changing sensitivity to reinforcement in multiple schedule performance as response requirements are changed.     

On the discriminability of stimulus duration.

The performance of pigeons trained to detect differences in the duration of stimuli was analysed using a matching model of signal detection. Two white stimuli, S1 and S2, differing in duration, were arranged with equal probability on the center key of a three-key chamber. S1 was systematically varied from 5 seconds to 25 seconds while S2 remained constant at 30 seconds. On completion of the center-key stimulus, a peck on the center key turned on the two red side keys. A left-key response was "correct" when S1 had been in effect on the center key and a right-key response was "correct" on S2 trials. A correct response produced a 3-second magazine light accompanied intermittently by food. Incorrect responses produced 3-second blackouts. Detection performance was measured under two procedures. In the first, the obtained reinforcement ratio was uncontrolled by allowing the number of food reinforcements obtained for correct left- and right-key responses to vary as the stimuli were changed. In the second procedure, the presentation of food reinforcement was controlled by holding the obtained reinforcement ratio constant. Discriminability changed as a function of stimulus differences under both procedures. No such trend was found in response bias.