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.     

Discriminability between alternatives in a switching-key concurrent schedule

Six pigeons were trained to discriminate between two intensities of white light in a symbolic matching-to-sample procedure. These stimuli were then used to signal which schedule was available on the main key in a switching-key concurrent schedule. The concurrent schedules led to a symbolic matching-to-sample phase in which the subject identified the concurrent schedule to which it last responded before a reinforcer could be obtained. The concurrent schedules were varied across conditions. Discriminability, measured during the symbolic matching-to-sample performance, was high throughout and did not differ across the two procedures. Performance in the concurrent schedules was like that typically obtained using these schedules. Delays were then arranged between completion of the concurrent schedules and presentations of the symbolic matching-to-sample phase. A series of conditions with an intervening delay of 10 s showed that both concurrent-schedule performance and symbolic matching-to-sample performance were affected by the delay in a similar way; that is, choice responding was closer to indifference.     

Effects of differences between stimuli, responses, and reinforcer rates on conditional discrimination performance

In a discrete-trial conditional discrimination procedure, 4 pigeons obtained food reinforcers by pecking a key with a short latency on trials signaled by one stimulus and by pecking the same key with a long latency on trials signaled by a second stimulus. The physical difference between the two stimuli and the temporal separation between the latency values required for reinforcement were varied factorially over four sets of conditions, and the ratio of reinforcer rates for short and long latencies was varied within each set of conditions. Stimulus discrimination varied directly with both stimulus and response differences and was unaffected by the reinforcer ratio. Sensitivity to reinforcement, estimated by generalized-matching-law fits to the data within each set of conditions, varied directly with the response difference but inversely with the stimulus difference arranged between sets of conditions. Because variations in stimulus differences, response differences, and reinforcer differences did not have equivalent effects, these findings question the functional equivalence of the three terms of the discriminated operant: antecedent stimuli, behavior, and consequences.     

Human Signal-detection Performance: Effects Of Signal Presentation Probabilities And Reinforcer Distributions

University students participated in one of four standard two-choice signal-detection experiments in which signal presentation probability was varied and the reinforcement distribution was held constant and equal. In Experiments 1, 3 and 4, subjects' performance showed a systematic response bias for reporting the stimulus presented least often. Experiments 1 and 4 showed that this effect was reliable with extended training and monetary, rather than point, reinforcement. In Experiment 2, all correct responses were signaled in some way, and this produced the opposite relationship between signal presentation probability and response bias. Experiments 1 and 3 found that explicitly deducting money (intended as punishment) for equal numbers of incorrect responses on each alternative, or varying the obtained overall rate of reinforcement, produced no clear change in response bias. The bias, shown by humans, for reporting the stimulus presented least often remains a challenge for theories of stimulus detection.     

Sentence processing strategies in healthy seniors with poor comprehension: an fMRI study

We used fMRI to examine patterns of brain recruitment in 22 healthy seniors, half of whom had selective comprehension difficulty for grammatically complex sentences. We found significantly reduced recruitment of left posterolateral temporal [Brodmann area (BA) 22/21] and left inferior frontal (BA 44/6) cortex in poor comprehenders compared to the healthy seniors with good sentence comprehension, cortical regions previously associated with language comprehension and verbal working memory, respectively. The poor comprehenders demonstrated increased activation of left prefrontal (BA 9/46), right dorsal inferior frontal (BA 44/6), and left posterior cingulate (BA 31/23) cortices for the grammatically simpler sentences that they understood. We hypothesize that these brain regions support an alternate, nongrammatical strategy for processing complex configurations of symbolic information. Moreover, these observations emphasize the crucial role of the left perisylvian network for grammatically guided sentence processing in subjects with good comprehension.     

Signal-detection analyses of conditional discrimination and delayed matching-to-sample performance

Quantitative analyses of stimulus control and reinforcer control in conditional discriminations and delayed matching-to-sample procedures often encounter a problem; it is not clear how to analyze data when subjects have not made errors. The present article examines two common methods for overcoming this problem. Monte Carlo simulations of performance demonstrated that both methods introduced systematic deviations into the results, and that there were genuine risks of drawing misleading conclusions concerning behavioral models of signal detection and animal short-term memory.     

Sensitivity to reward frequency in boys with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Compared the sensitivity of boys with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) to differences in reward frequency. Fifteen boys with ADHD as diagnosed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd ed., rev.; American Psychiatric Association, 1987) and a matched control group completed a signal-detection task in which correct identification of 1 stimulus was rewarded 3 times as often as correct identification of the other. Boys in the ADHD group completed the task twice, on and off medication. Group differences emerged in response bias toward the more frequently rewarded alternative. Boys in the control group showed a stable pattern of response bias, irrespective of which alternative they were last rewarded on. Boys in the ADHD group showed different patterns of response bias following rewards on the 2 alternatives. These results suggest children with ADHD were more sensitive to individual instances of reward compared with controls, whose response bias is governed more by their reinforcement history. Methylphenidate improved discriminability and reduced sensitivity to individual instances of reward in the boys with ADHD.     

Stimulus disparity and punisher control of human signal-detection performance

The present experiment examined the effects of varying stimulus disparity and relative punisher frequencies on signal detection by humans. Participants were placed into one of two groups. Group 3 participants were presented with 1:3 and 3:1 punisher frequency ratios, while Group 11 participants were presented with 1:11 and 11:1 punisher frequency ratios. For both groups, stimulus disparity was varied across three levels (low, medium, high) for each punisher ratio. In all conditions, correct responses were intermittently reinforced (1:1 reinforcer frequency ratio). Participants were mostly biased away from the more punished alternative, with more extreme response biases found for Group 11 participants compared to Group 3. For both groups, estimates of discriminability increased systematically across the three disparity levels and were unaffected by the punisher ratios. Likewise, estimates of response bias and sensitivity to the punisher ratios were unaffected by changes in discriminability, supporting the assumption of parameter invariance in the Davison and Tustin (1978) model of signal detection. Overall, the present experiment found no relation between stimulus control and punisher control, and provided further evidence for similar but opposite effects of punishers to reinforcers in signal-detection procedures.     

Receiver operating characteristics from nonhuman animals: Some implications and directions for research with humans

Reviews of signal detection have largely overlooked the research involving nonhuman animal subjects. Some of this research is presented and reanalyzed here. Plots of receiver operating characteristics show that human and nonhuman signal-detection performance is very similar. The studies emphasize the series of discriminations that comprise signal-detection tasks and illustrate the systematic effects of different methods of arranging payoffs or feedback, of the consistency of that feedback, and of the physical disparity between response alternatives. The data provide some support for recent theoretical accounts that favor a criterion location measure of isobias over the likelihood ratio, but they also suggest that more systematic work is required in this area. Overall, this research supports many contemporary views concerning signal detection, and it provides an alternative way of looking at some recurrent issues. It also suggests that extensions of signal detection to analyze data from other research paradigms require some caution, and it offers directions for complementary research with human subjects.