Motivational control of impulsive behavior interacts with choice opportunities

Impulsive behavior has been investigated through choice between a smaller/immediate reinforcer and a larger/delayed reinforcer, or through performance on a differential reinforcement of low rate (DRL) schedule. In the present study, we investigated a methodological divergence between these two procedures: in the former procedure, delay is a consequence of the subject's own choice, whereas in the later procedure, subjects are explicitly reinforced for delaying a response. In Experiment 1, 7 rats maintained at 80% of their free-feeding weights showed poorer efficiency of lever-pressing responses on a DRL 30-s schedule than when they were maintained at 90% of free-feeding weight. In Experiment 2, 16 rats were subjected to a concurrent chain schedule: the initial link was concurrent fixed ratio 1 fixed ratio 1, and each of these alternatives was followed by a short-DRL requirement with a one pellet reinforcer or a long-DRL requirement with a three pellet reinforcer. In one block of trials, rats were not allowed to choose between the two terminal links (forced-choice), whereas in the other block of trials rats were allowed to choose freely between the two terminal links (free-choice). Compared with rats maintained at 95% of their free-feeding weights, rats maintained at 80% of their free-feeding weights showed poorer efficiency in the terminal links’ DRL schedule performance (just as in Experiment 1), but this difference was shown only in the forced-choice blocks. These results indicate that motivational control of DRL schedule performance interacts with type of choice-making opportunity and highlight the direct comparison of motivational control of impulsive choice and DRL schedule performance.