Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
-
Food-reinforced key pecking in the pigeon was maintained under a four-component multiple schedule. In two components, responding was maintained at high rates under a random-ratio schedule. In the other two components, responding was maintained at low rates under a schedule that specified a minimum interresponse time. ⋯ At longer stimulus durations, low response rates were unaffected and high response rates were decreased during the stimulus. For two of three pigeons, high response rates maintained under a lower frequency of reinforcement tended to be decreased more than high response rates maintained under a higher reinforcement frequency. In general, the magnitude of decrease in high response rates was inversely related to the duration of the pre-food stimulus.
-
The effects of d-amphetamine on punished responding were studied in two experiments. In Experiment I, pigeons responded under a multiple fixed-ratio 30 response fixed-interval 5-min schedule of food presentation with 60-sec limited holds in both components. ⋯ Each response was punished with shock during one component, and every thirtieth response was punished in the other component. d-Amphetamine increased overall rates of punished responding only rarely under any of the punishment conditions; however, response rates within the fixed-interval when rates were low were increased by d-amphetamine when the shock intensity was low (Experiment I), or when responses produced shock intermittently (Experiment II). The data suggest that the effects of d-amphetamine on punished responding depend on the control rate of responding, the punishment intensity, the punishment frequency, and the schedule of food presentation.
-
Albino rats were conditioned to lever press during two-component multiple and mixed schedules in which response-dependent and response-independent reinforcers occurred in the different components. Relative response rates in the components associated with response-dependent reinforcers were higher (a) when different visual and auditory stimuli were associated with the two components and (b) when mixed schedule components were long in duration. These results illustrate the contribution of the response-reinforcer relation to stimulus control and schedule control of behavior. They also suggest that under some conditions, reinforcers need not be consistently associated with a particular response to ensure that the response is maintained at a relatively high rate.
-
Two experiments investigated free-operant avoidance responding with pigeons using a treadle-pressing response. In Experiment I, pigeons were initially trained on a free-operant avoidance schedule with a response-shock interval of 32 sec and a shock-shock interval of 10 sec, and were subsequently exposed to 10 values of the response-shock parameter ranging from 2.5 to 150 sec. The functions relating response rate to response-shock interval were similar to the ones reported by Sidman in his 1953 studies employing rats, and were independent of the order of presentation of the response-shock values. ⋯ In Experiment II, a free-operant avoidance schedule with a response-shock interval of 20 sec and a shock-shock interval of 5 sec was used, and shock intensities were varied over five values ranging from 2 to 32 mA. Response rates increased markedly as shock intensity increased from 2 to 8 mA, but rates changed little with further increases in shock intensity. Shock rates decreased as intensity increased from 2 to 8 mA, and showed little change as intensity increased from 8 to 32 mA.
-
Rats were trained to press a lever under schedules of food postponement. In the absence of lever presses, food was delivered periodically (food-food interval). Responses initiated a second interval (response-food interval) that was reset by each additional response. ⋯ However, responding was maintained in one animal when the food-food interval was decreased from 120 to 15 sec with the response-food interval at 30 sec. Results, in terms of several dependent variables, are compared with data on shock avoidance. Effects of response-independent and response-produced food and shock are discussed.