Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
-
Acquisition of discrete-trial lever-press avoidance learning was studied in three experiments. Experiment I compared a new training procedure, which produces rates of lever-press avoidance learning comparable to those obtained in shuttle boxes, with a "conventional", less efficient training procedure. A factorial design was used to compare continuous versus intermittent shock and a long-variable versus a short-fixed signal-shock interval. ⋯ At intervals longer than 20 sec, the animals made progressively less use of their increased opportunity to respond. The data do not support the opportunity-to-respond interpretation of the effects of duration of signal-shock interval and suggest that some type of inhibitory process may block lever-press avoidance learning at intervals as short as 10 sec. The significance of these findings for species-specific defense reaction and preparedness theories was emphasized.
-
Four Asian quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica) were exposed to concurrent-chain schedules, the terminal links of which were either variable-interval 30 sec and variable-time 30 sec, or fixed-interval 30 sec and fixed-time 30 sec. Except for one bird that exhibited a preference for the variable-interval schedule over the variable-time schedule, no consistent preferences were demonstrated for response-dependent or response-independent schedules. ⋯ The discrimination between terminal-link schedules was rapidly recovered after the schedule positions were reversed. Casual observations revealed that the birds engaged in stereotypic circling and pecking while the response-independent schedules were operative.
-
Two experiments investigated the extent to which response contingencies influence the choice between two schedules of reinforcement by exposing pigeons to a concurrent-chains procedure in which reinforcers in one terminal link were response-independent, and in the other terminal link, response-dependent. In Experiment 1, the pigeons were indifferent between an aperiodic, response-independent schedule and an aperiodic, response-dependent schedule that required a minimum rate of responding. ⋯ In Experiment 2, the pigeons preferred a periodic, response-independent schedule to a periodic, response-dependent schedule that shared a feature with a required-rate schedule: there was a requirement to respond early in the interreinforcement interval, when responding produced reinforcement only later. The results of the two experiments suggest the following general interpretation: pigeons prefer a second schedule to the extent that the response contingencies of the first schedule must be satisfied during discriminable periods of nonreinforcement.
-
Three rats were trained on an unsignalled shuttlebox-avoidance task under three response-shock intervals (10, 20, and 40 sec). Under all conditions, subjects developed excellent temporal gradients of avoidance; that is, response rate was an increasing function of time since last response. ⋯ In all cases, response rate relative to the maximum response rate was approximately equal to the proportion of the interval that had elapsed. This suggests that rats in unsignalled avoidance are estimating time from response completion, and that the units of the estimate are proportional parts of the response-shock interval.
-
For three pigeons, reinforcement depended upon a left side-key response after execution of a fixed ratio 10 on the center key, and upon a right side-key response after fixed ratio 20. Each response during the fixed ratios produced a 0.5-sec blackout. ⋯ When the time between the first and last response was equated during both ratios, asymptotic accuracy was approximately equal to (two birds) or somewhat higher than (one bird) that obtained previously. The results of probes with intermediate fixed ratios and blackouts suggested that control of side-key choice had transferred from the time between the first and last response in ratios to blackout duration.