Duration of components and response rates on multiple fixed-ratio schedules

Pigeons were exposed to a two-component multiple fixed-ratio X fixed-ratio Y schedule of reinforcement in which X was always less than Y. Components were equal in duration and alternated at rates that varied between 2 sec and 23.5 h. Relative response rate in the FR X component: (1) increased as the duration of components increased between 2 sec and 15 min, (2) was at a maximum between 15 min and 6 h, and (3) decreased as the duration of components increased from 6 h to 23.5 h. The changes in relative response rate were attributable primarily to changes in absolute response rates during the FR Y schedule as absolute response rates during the FR X schedule were relatively invariant. These results pose complexities for several theoretical formulations.     

Differences between rates of responding emitted during simple and multiple schedules

Pigeons pecked keys for food reinforcers delivered by several variable-interval and multiple variable-interval schedules. The rates of responding emitted during the simple schedules were not systematically different from the rates emitted during the multiple schedules when the components of the multiple schedule were identical. The rates of responding emitted during the components were usually greater than the rates emitted during comparable simple schedules when the components were more favorable than the added components of the multiple schedules. Response rates during the components were not significantly lower than those during comparable simple schedules when the components were less favorable. The observation of higher rates of responding during the more favorable components conforms to a prediction of several additive theories (e.g., Rachlin, 1973) but violates a prediction of Herrnstein’s (1970) theory. However, the additive theories are brought into question by the fact that changing the location of the discriminative stimuli did not change the pattern of results.     

The isolation of stimulus-reinforcer associations established with multiple schedules

Multiple schedules established stimulus-reinforcer (S-S^R) associations on baselines in which equal response rates and patterning were maintained in all components. Subsequently, stimuli associated with an increase in reinforcement but no change in ongoing response rate were compounded. For one experimental group, free-operant avoidance (FOA) was programmed in tone and in light while variable-interval (VI) food reinforcement was effective in their simultaneous absence (T + L). The opposite stimulus-schedule combinations were programmed for the other. Both groups remained in their VI components 85% of the session on schedule preference tests, and on a stimulus compounding test emitted approximately 1.5 times as many responses to tone-plus-light (T + L) as to tone or light alone. This is the first report of additive summation to combined discriminative stimuli associated with only an increase in reinforcement. Nondifferentially trained controls who had the same contingency effective in tone, light, and T + L-VI or FOA—showed neither preference among schedule components or summation during stimulus compounding, indicating that nonassociative stimulus factors made no contribution to either resultant in the experimental animals. Evidence supporting an algebraic combination of response and reinforcement associations is presented, and functional similarities between transfer-of-control studies and the stimulus compounding tests of the experimental groups in the present experiment are discussed.     

Component duration effects in multiple schedules

Previous research has produced conflicting results regarding the effects of component duration on interactions in multiple schedules. In Experiment 1, potential sources of this conflict were evaluated. Both the effects of absolute reinforcement rate and carry-over effects (hysteresis) from a preceding condition were isolated. When 10-sec components were used, the sensitivity of relative response rate to relative reinforcement rate was affected very little by hysteresis effects and absolute reinforcement rate, but it was systematically reduced as a function of the number of prior conditions. Sensitivity to relative reinforcement rate was also substantially higher with the 10-sec components than with 2-min components. In Experiment 2, this effect of component duration was decomposed into two separate effects. Contrast effects during presentation of a target component with a constant reinforcement rate were greater the shorter the target component was itself; but they were smaller the shorter the alternative component in which reinforcement rate was varied. The latter effect was smaller and more unreliable across subjects. The existence of these two separate effects demonstrates that the usual method of studying component duration—that is, holding all components equal in duration—systematically causes underestimation of the effects of the component duration, and obscures the different processes controlling the two effects.     

Behavioral contrast and responding during multiple food-food,food-water,and water-water schedules

Five pigeons pecked lighted keys for food reinforcers delivered by several multiple variable interval 2-min variable interval 2-min schedules. At different times, the components of the multiple schedule both supplied food reinforcers, both supplied water, or one supplied food and the other supplied water. Rates of responding during the water component of the food-water schedule were lower than the rates during comparable components of the water-water schedules (negative contrast). But, the rates of responding during the food component of the food-water schedule were not greater than the rates of responding during comparable components of the food-food schedules (absence of positive contrast) at two different levels of water deprivation. These results raise questions about several theories of behavioral contrast, and they may restrict the scope of any theory that attributes positive and negative contrast to symmetrical factors.     

Within-session changes in responding during concurrent schedules that employ two different operanda

Five rats responded on several concurrent schedules in which pressing a key produced reinforcers in one component and pressing a lever produced reinforcers in the other component (Experiment 1). Four pigeons responded on several concurrent keypeck treadlepress schedules (Experiment 2). The programmed rates of reinforcement varied from 15 to 240 reinforcers per hour in different conditions. Rates of responding usually changed systematically within experimental sessions, and the changes were similar for the two components of a concurrent schedule. These results imply that within-session changes in responding may not confound the predictions of theories that describe the ratio of the rates of responding during the two components of concurrent schedules. Instead, within-session changes may be controlled by a mechanism that integrates the reinforcers obtained from the two components.     

Adjunctive behavior in multiple schedules of reinforcement

A recent theory of timing (Killeen & Fetterman, 1988) suggests that adjunctive behaviors may act as discriminative cues for the passage of time and that the rate of transition between those behaviors is affected by the rate of reinforcement within the experimental context. Is the rate of transition between behaviors correlated with the rate of reinforcement? What is the context in which rate of reinforcement is calibrated? If rate of transition is correlated with reinforcement frequency, does this correlation change with extended training? Four pigeons were trained on multiple fixed-time schedules of reinforcement, with one component always FT 15 sec, the other either FT 15 sec, FT 45 sec, or FT 5 sec. Behavior was coded into one of 12 categories. Response distributions in the constant component shifted when rate of reinforcement was varied in the other component and eventually shifted back toward their original location.     

Second-order schedules: Manipulation of brief-stimulus duration at component completion

In a second-order schedule, fixed-interval components were reinforced according to a variable-interval schedule. A brief stimulus accompanied the completion of each fixed interval. Brief-stimulus duration was varied across conditions from 0.5 to 8 sec. Patterning was greater the longer the duration of the stimulus. Additionally, exposure to relatively long brief-stimulus durations enhanced patterning upon reexposure to shorter brief-stimulus durations.     

Stimulus control in multiple variable-ratio schedules of reinforcement

One component of a multiple variable-ratio 150 variable-ratio 150 schedule remained unchanged while the reinforcement schedule of the other component was periodically changed to extinction and then returned to variable ratio 150. When the reinforcement schedule of the changed component was an unmodified variable ratio 150 schedule, the magnitude of negative contrast during baseline recovery was equal to the magnitude of positive contrast observed during the previous change from multiple variable-ratio 150 variable-ratio 150 to multiple variable-ratio 150 extinction. When the schedule of the changed component was modified during baseline recovery so that responses terminating interresponse times greater than the average baseline interresponse time in the unchanged component were not reinforced, the magnitude of the unchanged-component response rate decrease was reduced. The magnitude of negative contrast was attenuated even though response and reinforcement rates in the variable component increased to levels at or above their prior multiple variable-ratio 150 variable-ratio 150 baseline levels. The results support a general theory that negative contrast results from both (1) the removal of certain positive-contrast-producing operations and (2) changes in the interresponse time-reinforcer relations that occur as a byproduct of schedule manipulations.     

Temporal comparator rules and responding in multiple schedules

Three response rules for explaining the role of temporal factors in the control of responding were examined. These were the cycle-to-trial comparator rule from scalar expectancy theory (SET; Gibbon & Balsam, 1981), the “deletion” comparator rule proposed by Cooper, Aronson, Balsam, and Gibbon (1990), and a “bad/good” comparator rule—a type of ITI-to-trial comparator. Two of these rules were designed to explain the acquisition of responding in simple associative learning paradigms (i.e., autoshaping). Here, their generality as predictors of response levels in response-dependent multiple schedules was examined. SET’s overall cycle-to-trial comparator rule was the best predictor of the pattern of responding. Contrary to previous findings regarding contrast in multiple schedules, which show greater contrast with shorter component durations, there was no effect of absolute component duration. As predicted by SET, relative, not absolute, component durations controlled response levels.     

Home cage feeding time controls responding under multiple schedules

Eleven rats were exposed to a multiple variable-interval 1-min variable-interval 1-min schedule of reinforcement. All rats were initially fed a daily ration of food in the home cages immediately after the end of each session. In a later phase of the experiment, the same amount of food was fed 1 h after the end of each session. Later, five rats were again fed immediately after each session. Amount of food received and deprivation level in terms of percent of free feeding weight were constant across conditions. Response rates decreased within each session under immediate feeding. When feeding was delayed, rates in each component of the multiple schedule increased throughout the session and the decreasing trends were generally eliminated. The results suggest that home cage feeding time, apart from changes in deprivational level, is an important variable in the control of behavior in experimental sessions.     

Procedure for preventing response strain on random interval schedules with a linear feedback loop

An experiment examined the impact of a procedure designed to prevent response or extinction strain occurring on random interval schedules with a linear feedback loop (i.e., an RI+ schedule). Rats lever-pressed for food reinforcement on either a RI+ or a random interval (RI) schedule that was matched to the RI+ schedule in terms of reinforcement rate. Two groups of rats responded on an RI+ and two on an RI schedule matched for rate of reinforcement. One group on each schedule also received response-independent food if there had been no response for 60 s, and response-independent food continued to be delivered on an RT-60 schedule until a response was made. Rats on the RI and RI+ obtained similar rates of reinforcement and had similar reinforced inter-response times to one another. On the schedules without response-independent food, rats had similar rates of response to one another. However, while the delivery of response-independent food reduced rates of response on an RI schedule, they enhanced response rates on an RI+ schedule. These results suggest that rats can display sensitivity to the molar aspects of the free-operant contingency, when procedures are implemented to reduce the impact of factors such as extinction-strain.     

Adjunctive drinking during variable and random-interval food reinforcement schedules

Rats were trained to leverpress for food and subsequently exposed to either arithmetic series or random variable-interval reinforcement schedules. Adjunctive drinking developed in all subjects exposed to arithmetic variable-interval reinforcement, but did not develop in six of the eight animals trained on the random schedule. The results suggest that adjunctive drinking is the result of an interaction between the tendency of rats to drink after eating and the ability of locally low probabilities of reinforcement within schedules to induce conditioned behavioral states.     

不同文化视角中的体态语交际对比

人类进行交际活动最重要的工具是语言，但又绝不仅限于语言，还依靠许多非语言交际行为。非语言交际行为主要是指体态语。体态语与言语一样，是一定社会文化的产物，是长期历史和文化积淀而成的某一社会共同的习惯，也就是说体态语具有文化性。不同的文化之间体态语的功能及表达的意义差别很大。本文拟从不同的文化视角对几种体态语行为加以对比和探讨。     

Time and response matching with topographically different responses

Four pigeons were exposed to several nonindependent concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. One schedule component required a keypecking response; the other component required a treadlepressing response. The birds matched the ratio of their behavior (as measured by responses and time) between the two topographically different responses to the ratio of reinforcement in those two components. When additional foods not contingent on a keypeck or treadle-press were then added, the birds matched time spent in the components to total rates of food delivered in those components; response matching was somewhat disrupted. The matching law, developed under concurrent variable-interval schedules requiring similar responses, can thus account for choice behavior involving topographically different responses.     

Specification of the stimulus-reinforcer relation in multiple schedules: Delay and probability of reinforcement

Control of pigeons’ keypecking by a stimulus-reinforcer contingency was investigated in the context of a four-component multiple schedule. In each of three experiments, pigeons were exposed to a schedule consisting of two two-component sequences. Discriminative stimuli identifying each sequence were present only in Component 1, which was 4, 6, or 8 sec in duration, while reinforcers could be earned only in Component 2 (30 sec in duration). Control by a stimulus-reinforcer contingency was sought during Component 1 by arranging a differential relation between Component 1 cues and schedule of reinforcement in Component 2. In Experiment 1, rate of keypecking during Component 1 varied with the presence and absence of a stimulus-reinforcer contingency. When a contingency was introduced, rate of keypecking increased during the Component 1 cue associated with the availability of reinforcement in Component 2. In Experiment 2, the stimulus-reinforcer contingency was manipulated parametrically by varying the correlation between Component 1 cues and Component 2 schedules of reinforcement. Responding in Component 1 varied as a function of strength of the stimulus-reinforcer contingency. The relatively high rates of Component 1 responding observed in Experiments 1 and 2 pose difficulties for conceptions of stimulus-reinforcer control based on probability of reinforcement. In these two experiments, the stimulus-associated probabilities of reinforcement in Component 1 were invariant at zero. An alternate dimension of stimulus-reinforcer control was explored in Experiment 3, in which Component 1 cues were differentially associated with delay to reinforcement in Component 2, while probability of reinforcement was held constant across components. When the stimulus-reinforcer contingency was in force, rate of responding in Component 1 varied inversely with delay to reinforcement in Component 2. In a quantitative analysis of data from Experiments 2 and 3, relative rate of responding during Component 1 was strongly correlated with two measures of relative delay to reinforcement.     

Stimulus control of behavior during the postreinforcement pause of FI schedules

Pigeons were given the opportunity to terminate certain segments of fixed intervals by pecking a control key. When 30-sec segments of negative and positive stimuli alternated across the interreinforcement interval (Experiment 1), most birds terminated a large proportion of negative segments. However, few control-key responses were made during the negative segment immediately following food presentation. Under schedules during which only one negative segment was programmed, during the first 30 sec of 1-min intervals (Experiment 2), control-key responses, when they occurred at all, were made after several seconds of the interval had elapsed. Similar findings were obtained when a peck on the control key merely changed the color on the food key (Experiment 3). These findings suggest that the post-reinforcement extinction state (Schneider, 1969) during fixed-interval schedules consists of two phases: an immediate postreinforcement inhibitory phase, followed by a second phase during which a control-key response may occur. These two phases and their associated behavior may be related to Staddon’s (1977) distinction between interim and facultative activities.     

多选择串联系统最优冗余问题的精确算法

1IntroductionReliability opti mization plays an i mportant role inthe planning and design of moderntechnological syste-ms[1,2].Although components with high reliability canbe manufactured as the modern technology deve-lops,the requirements for the systems reliability are oftenbeyond the capability of manufacturing.This is spe-cially true for systems where a failure of the systemwill result in catastrophic consequence.On the otherhand,adopting high reliability components in a systemmay be infea…     

Human causality judgments and response rates on DRL and DRH schedules of reinforcement

The effect of various relationships between a response (an investment made in the context of a game) and an outcome (a return on the investment) on judgments of the causal effectiveness of the response was examined. In Experiment 1, response rates and causal judgments were higher for a differential-reinforcement-of-high-rate (DRH) schedule relative to a variable-ratio (VR) schedule with the same probability of outcome following a response. Response rates were also higher for a DRH than for a variable-interval schedule matched for reinforcement rate. In Experiment 2, response rates and causal judgments were lower for a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule relative to a VR schedule with the same probability of outcome following a response. These results corroborate the view that schedules are a determinant of both response rates and causal judgments, and that few current theories of causal judgment explicitly predict this pattern of results.