Search

When reinforcer availability on one alternative of a concurrent schedule is signaled by a discriminative stimulus, responding on that alternative decreases. We investigated how the correlation between signal presentation and reinforcement (signal reliability) affects choice between signaled and unsignaled alternatives. Six pigeons responded in a concurrent schedule, in which reinforcers on one alternative were signaled by a key-color change. Across conditions, the probability of reinforcement following signal presentation varied (the probability in its absence was the complement). As signal reliability increased, response rates and latencies following signal onset on the signaled alternative decreased, whereas responding on the unsignaled alternative remained unchanged. Because the signal did not alter overall reinforcer rates, these findings are consistent with matching theories and research suggesting that responding on one alternative of a concurrent schedule depends on reinforcer, but not response, rates on other alternatives. However, these findings are inconsistent with others demonstrating concomitant changes in responding on signaled and unsignaled alternatives. We consider whether a response-competition account of concurrent performance can explain these discrepancies, and suggest avenues for future studies to investigate the mechanisms underlying effects of signaled reinforcement in concurrent schedules., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

We introduce to behavior analysis a way of analyzing choice behavior that exploits recent developments in nanoeconomics, financial economics, and econometrics. A response return, modeled on an economic return, is the log differenced count of responses allocated to each of two alternatives during a short time window, compared with that in the immediately preceding window. The response return is a new dependent variable which offers a novel and useful way of looking at operant behavior, especially at the molecular level of analysis. The response-return series is a near-instantaneous measure of an organism's dynamic preferences for each of two alternatives. Analyzing such a series requires time-analytic techniques, including Auto-Regressive Conditional Heteroskedastic (ARCH) models. We illustrate these techniques by analyzing choices between combinations of arithmetic and exponential variable-interval schedules with pigeon subjects. All response-return series were well-fitted by one of three ARCH-family models. The fitted models were differentially sensitive to transition versus steady-state data samples. The particular insights that the ARCH analyses offer are improved understanding of the effects of the instantaneous effects of reinforcers and their absence, of how the distribution of reinforcers in time affects choice, and of the differences between choice in transition and at steady state., (© 2019 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.)

Several studies suggest that the degree of control by reinforcer ratios (environment tracking) and by exteroceptive stimuli that signal future reinforcer availability (signal following) depends on environmental certainty: As reinforcers become more likely at one location, environmental contingencies exert stronger control and exteroceptive stimuli exert weaker control. This research has not yet been extended to environments in which reinforcer availability changes across time, even though such changes are present in most natural environments. Thus, in the present experiment, we examined environment tracking and signal following in a concurrent schedule in which the reinforcer ratio reversed to its reciprocal 30 s after a reinforcer delivery and keylight-color stimuli signaled the likely or definite time or location of the next reinforcer. Across conditions, we manipulated environmental certainty by varying the probability of reinforcer deliveries on the locally richer key. This made the location of future reinforcers at a particular time more or less certain, but did not change the overall reinforcer ratio. Changes in local environmental certainty had little to no effect on environment tracking and signal following; in all conditions, keylight-color stimuli strongly controlled choice and reinforcer ratios exerted weak control. The present findings suggest that the extent of environment tracking and signal following is primarily determined by global, not local, environmental certainty., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

In concurrent schedules with a changeover delay (COD), choice often strongly favours the just-reinforced alternative immediately after a reinforcer delivery. These 'preference pulses' may be caused by a change in reinforcer availability created by the COD, and/or because the COD decreases the overall probability of switching. We investigated which explanation better accounts for preference pulses by arranging concurrent schedules that allowed us to separate the COD's effects on reinforcer availability from its effects on the probability of switching. When the reinforcer ratio was 1:1, pulses were inconsistently accompanied by changes in reinforcer availability, but consistently accompanied by longer visits. These pulses appeared to be related only to the decreased probability of switching caused by the COD, providing the first evidence of pulses after reinforcers caused by the probability of switching alone. When the reinforcer ratio was 1:5 or 5:1; preference pulses were accompanied by changes in reinforcer availability and by longer visits. These pulses appeared to be related to the COD's effects on reinforcer availability, although a small portion appeared to be related to low probability of switching. These findings suggest that the COD affects preference pulses by both decreasing the probability of switching and creating a change in reinforcer availability., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Choosing the appropriate response given the circumstance is integral to all aspects of human behavior. One way of elucidating the mechanisms of choice is to relate behavior to neural correlates. Electrophysiological evidence implicates the ERP feedback-negativity (FN) and the P300 as promising neural correlates of reward processing, an integral component of learning. However, prior research has not adequately addressed how the development of a preference to select one option over another (choice preference) relates to the FN and the P300. We assessed whether variation in choice preference predicted the FN and P300 amplitude within subjects. We used a discrete-trials two-alternative choice procedure, where the reinforcer rate for each option was dependently scheduled by a concurrent variable interval. The reinforcer ratio for selecting each option was varied between sessions. Choice was quantified using both the generalized matching law sensitivity and the log odds of staying on the same versus switching to the other alternative (stay preference). The relationship between stay preference, FN, and P300 amplitudes was assessed using the innovative application of hierarchical Bayesian linear regression. The results demonstrate that stay preference was controlled by the reinforcer ratios and credibly predicted the FN amplitude but not P300 amplitude. The findings are consistent with the view that reinforcers may guide behavior by what they signal about future reinforcement, with the FN related to such a process., (© 2017 Society for Psychophysiological Research.)

In concurrent schedules, reinforcers are often followed by a brief period of heightened preference for the just-productive alternative. Such 'preference pulses' may reflect local effects of reinforcers on choice. However, similar pulses may occur after nonreinforced responses, suggesting that pulses after reinforcers are partly unrelated to reinforcer effects. McLean, Grace, Pitts, and Hughes (2014) recommended subtracting preference pulses after responses from preference pulses after reinforcers, to construct residual pulses that represent only reinforcer effects. Thus, a reanalysis of existing choice data is necessary to determine whether changes in choice after reinforcers in previous experiments were actually related to reinforcers. In the present paper, we reanalyzed data from choice experiments in which reinforcers served different functions. We compared local choice, mean visit length, and visit-length distributions after reinforcers and after nonreinforced responses. Our reanalysis demonstrated the utility of McLean et al.'s preference-pulse correction for determining the effects of reinforcers on choice. However, visit analyses revealed that residual pulses may not accurately represent reinforcer effects, and reinforcer effects were clearer in visit analyses than in local-choice analyses. The best way to determine the effects of reinforcers on choice may be to conduct visit analyses in addition to local-choice analyses., (© 2017 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.)

We investigated why violations to the constant-ratio rule, an assumption of the generalized matching law, occur in procedures that arrange frequent changes to reinforcer ratios. Our investigation produced steady-state data and compared them with data from equivalent, frequently changing procedures. Six pigeons responded in a four-alternative concurrent-schedule experiment with an arranged reinforcer-rate ratio of 27:9:3:1. The same four variable-interval schedules were used in every condition, for 50 sessions, and the physical location of each schedule was changed across conditions. The experiment was a steady-state version of a frequently changing procedure in which the locations of four VI schedules were changed every 10 reinforcers. We found that subjects' responding was consistent with the constant-ratio rule in the steady-state procedure. Additionally, local analyses showed that preference after reinforcement was towards the alternative that was likely to produce the next reinforcer, instead of being towards the just-reinforced alternative as in frequently changing procedures. This suggests that the effect of a reinforcer on preference is fundamentally different in rapidly changing and steady-state environments. Comparing this finding to the existing literature suggests that choice is more influenced by reinforcer-generated signals when the reinforcement contingencies often change., (© Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.)

The current experiment examined the degree to which locally varying food probabilities on two keys across time since food presentations can continue to control choice until the next food delivery. In two sets of conditions, the probability of food delivery being made available on one key relative to the other key varied sinusoidally across a 1-min period following each food delivery. In Set 1, food-probability changes were unsignaled and the number of cycles per min was varied across conditions. In Set 2, there were always two complete cycles of the sinusoid in the 1-min period, and brief key-color changes were arranged at a selection of fixed times since food delivery to signal portions of the sinusoid. In Set 1, control of choice by local probability of food on each key decreased over time since food delivery. Control by local food probabilities was greater in conditions that arranged fewer cycles per min. The onset of stimulus changes in Set 2 led to a transient reinstatement of local control by food probabilities regardless of the portion of the sinusoidal variation in food probabilities signaled by the stimuli. However, in conditions where the same colored stimuli signaled different portions of the sinusoidal variation in food-delivery probabilities, stimulus changes attenuated joint control by elapsed time and food-probability values. These results suggest that, changing relative food probabilities and stimuli can direct preference toward the likely location of the next food delivery across time since a food presentation, although the degree to which control over choice will be maintained across elapsed time depends on how experimenter-arranged contingencies are mapped onto elapsed time., (© Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.)

Data from five experiments on choice between more than two variable-interval schedules were modeled with different equations for the Law of Effect. Navakatikyan's (2007) component-functions models with three, four and five free parameters were compared with Stevens' (1957), Herrnstein's (1970) and Davison and Hunter's (1976) equations. These latter models are consistent with the generalized-matching principle, whereas Navakatikyan's models are not. Navakatikyan's models performed better or on par with their competitors, especially in predicting residence-time data and generalized-matching sensitivities for time allocation. The models described well an observed decrease, in several of these data sets, in generalized-matching sensitivity between two alternatives when reinforcer rate increased on the other alternatives. Models built on the generalized-matching principle cannot do this. Navakatikyan's models also performed better, though to a lesser extent, than their competitors for data sets that are not obviously inconsistent with generalized matching., (© Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.)

Five pigeons were trained in a procedure in which, with a specified probability, food was either available on a fixed-interval schedule on the left key, or on a variable-interval schedule on the right key. In Phase 1, we arranged, with a probability of 0.5, either a left-key fixed-interval schedule or a right-key variable-interval 30s, and varied the value of the fixed-interval schedule from 5s to 50s across 5 conditions. In Phase 2, we arranged either a left-key fixed-interval 20-s schedule or a right-key variable-interval 30-s schedule, and varied the probability of the fixed-interval schedule from 0.05 to 1.0 across 8 conditions. Phase 3 always arranged a fixed-interval schedule on the left key, and its value was varied over the same range as in Phase 1. In Phase 1, overall preference was generally toward the variable-interval schedule, preference following reinforcers was initially toward the variable-interval schedule, and maximum preference for the fixed-interval schedule generally occurred close to the arranged fixed-interval time, becoming relatively constant thereafter. In Phase 2, overall left-key preference followed the probability of the fixed-interval schedule, and maximum fixed-interval choice again occurred close to the fixed-interval time, except when the fixed-interval probability was 0.1 or less. The pattern of choice following reinforcers was similar to that in Phase 1, but the peak fixed-interval choice became more peaked with higher probabilities of the fixed interval. Phase 3 produced typical fixed-interval schedule responding. The results are discussed in terms of reinforcement effects, timing in the context of alternative reinforcers, and generalized matching. These results can be described by a quantitative model in which reinforcer rates obtained at times since the last reinforcer are distributed across time according to a Gaussian distribution with constant coefficient of variation before the fixed-interval schedule time, changing to extended choice controlled by extended reinforcer ratios beyond the fixed-interval time. The same model provides a good description of response rates on single fixed-interval schedules., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Reinforcers may increase operant responding via a response-strengthening mechanism whereby the probability of the preceding response increases, or via some discriminative process whereby the response more likely to provide subsequent reinforcement becomes, itself, more likely. We tested these two accounts. Six pigeons responded for food reinforcers in a two-alternative switching-key concurrent schedule. Within a session, equal numbers of reinforcers were arranged for responses to each alternative. Those reinforcers strictly alternated between the two alternatives in half the conditions, and were randomly allocated to the alternatives in half the conditions. We also varied, across conditions, the alternative that became available immediately after a reinforcer. Preference after a single reinforcer always favored the immediately available alternative, regardless of the local probability of a reinforcer on that alternative (0 or 1 in the strictly alternating conditions, .5 in the random conditions). Choice then reflected the local reinforcer probabilities, suggesting some discriminative properties of reinforcement. At a more extended level, successive same-alternative reinforcers from an alternative systematically shifted preference towards that alternative, regardless of which alternative was available immediately after a reinforcer. There was no similar shift when successive reinforcers came from alternating sources. These more temporally extended results may suggest a strengthening function of reinforcement, or an enhanced ability to respond appropriately to "win-stay" contingencies over "win-shift" contingencies.

It has long been understood that food deliveries may act as signals of future food location, and not only as strengtheners of prefood responding as the law of effect suggests. Recent research has taken this idea further--the main effect of food deliveries, or other "reinforcers", may be signaling rather than strengthening. The present experiment investigated the ability of food deliveries to signal food contingencies across time after food. In Phase 1, the next food delivery was always equally likely to be arranged for a left- or a right-key response. Conditions were arranged such that the next food delivery was likely to occur either sooner on the left (or right) key, or sooner on the just-productive (or not-just-productive) key. In Phase 2, similar contingencies were arranged, but the last-food location was signaled by a red keylight. Preference, measured in 2-s bins across interfood intervals, was jointly controlled by the likely time and location of the next food delivery. In Phase 1, when any food delivery signaled a likely sooner next food delivery on a particular key, postfood preference was strongly toward that key, and moved toward the other key across the interreinforcer interval. In other conditions in which food delivery on the two keys signaled different subsequent contingencies, postfood preference was less extreme, and quickly moved toward indifference. In Phase 2, in all three conditions, initial preference was strongly toward the likely-sooner food key, and moved to the other key across the interfood interval. In both phases, at a more extended level of analysis, sequences of same-key food deliveries caused a small increase in preference for the just-productive key, suggesting the presence of a "reinforcement effect", albeit one that was very small.

Conditioned reinforcer effects may be due to the stimulus' discriminative rather than its strengthening properties. While this was demonstrated in a frequently-changing choice procedure, a single attempt to replicate in a relatively static choice environment failed. We contend that this was because the information provided by the stimuli was nonredundant in the frequently-changing preparation, and redundant in the steady-state arrangement. In the present experiments, 6 pigeons worked in a steady-state concurrent schedule procedure with nonredundant informative stimuli (red keylight illuminations). When a response-contingent red keylight signaled that the next food delivery was more likely on one of the two alternatives, postkeylight choice responding was reliably for that alternative. This effect was enhanced after a history of extended informative red keylight presentation (Experiment 2). These results lend support to recent characterizations of conditioned reinforcer effects as reflective of a discriminative, rather than a reinforcing, property of the stimulus.

We aimed to investigate whether novel stimulus relations would emerge from stimulus correlations when those relations explicitly conflicted with reinforced relations. In a symbolic matching-to-sample task using kanji characters as stimuli, we arranged class-specific incorrect comparison stimuli in each of three classes. After presenting either Ax or Cx stimuli as samples, choices of Bx were reinforced and choices of Gx or Hx were not. Tests for symmetry, and combined symmetry and transitivity, showed the emergence of three 3-member (AxBxCx) stimulus classes in 5 of 5 human participants. Subsequent tests for all possible emergent relations between Ax, Bx, Cx and the class-specific incorrect comparisons Gx and Hx showed that these relations emerged for 4 of 5 the participants after extended overtraining of the baseline relations. These emergent relations must have been based on stimulus-stimulus correlations, and were not properties of the trained discriminated operants, because they required control by relations explicitly extinguished during training. This result supports theoretical accounts of emergent relations that emphasize stimulus correlation over operant contingencies.

Four pigeons were trained on two-key concurrent variable-interval schedules with no changeover delay. In Phase 1, relative reinforcers on the two alternatives were varied over five conditions from .1 to .9. In Phases 2 and 3, we instituted a molar feedback function between relative choice in an interreinforcer interval and the probability of reinforcers on the two keys ending the next interreinforcer interval. The feedback function was linear, and was negatively sloped so that more extreme choice in an interreinforcer interval made it more likely that a reinforcer would be available on the other key at the end of the next interval. The slope of the feedback function was -1 in Phase 2 and -3 in Phase 3. We varied relative reinforcers in each of these phases by changing the intercept of the feedback function. Little effect of the feedback functions was discernible at the local (interreinforcer interval) level, but choice measured at an extended level across sessions was strongly and significantly decreased by increasing the negative slope of the feedback function.

Six pigeons responded on a four-key concurrent variable-interval schedule in which a 27:9:3:1 distribution of reinforcers between the keys changed every 10 reinforcers. Their behaviour quickly came under the control of this changing four-way reinforcer ratio. However, preference between a pair of keys depended not only on the relative reinforcer rates on those keys, but also on the absolute levels of those rates. This contradicts the constant-ratio rule that underpins the matching approach to choice, but is predicted by a contingency-discriminability model that assumes that organisms may occasionally misattribute reinforcers to a response that did not produce them. Reinforcers produced strong preference pulses, or transient increases in responding on the just-reinforced key. Despite accurate tracking of the reinforcer ratio, reinforcers obtained late in components and from leaner keys still produced strong pulses, suggesting both extended and local control of behaviour. Patterns of switching between keys were graded and similarly controlled by the reinforcer rates on each key. Whether considered in terms of switching, local preference pulses, or extended preference, behaviour was controlled by a rapidly changing four-way reinforcer ratio in a graduated, continuous manner that is unlikely to be explained by a simple heuristic such as fix-and-sample., (Copyright (c) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Using data from two conditions of an experiment that arranged response-contingent foods and red keylight illuminations, we compared time-indexed and response-indexed preference pulses. The interpretation of red keylight effects (relative to food effects) differed according to whether time or behaviour was used to index choice in the post-event period: preference after a red keylight was more extreme than after a food in the response pulses while preference after a food was more extreme than after a keylight in the time pulses. This was due to different response latencies following the two events in combination with a tendency for initial preference to decrease as latency increased: responding began sooner after non-foods and responding that began later, after any event, tended towards indifference. Our finding suggests that preference pulses ought to be indexed according to time since the last event delivery, particularly if the response-contingent events may result in systematically different response latencies., (Copyright (c) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

One assumption of the matching approach to choice is that different independent variables control choice independently of each other. We tested this assumption for reinforcer rate and magnitude in an extensive parametric experiment. Five pigeons responded for food reinforcement on switching-key concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules. Across conditions, the ratios of reinforcer rates and of reinforcer magnitudes on the two alternatives were both manipulated. Control by each independent variable, as measured by generalized-matching sensitivity, changed significantly with the ratio of the other independent variable. Analyses taking the model-comparison approach, which weighs improvement in goodness-of-fit against increasing number of free parameters, were inconclusive. These analyses compared a model assuming constant sensitivity to magnitude across all reinforcer-rate ratios with two alternative models. One of those alternatives allowed sensitivity to magnitude to vary freely across reinforcer-rate ratios, and was less efficient than the common-sensitivity model for all pigeons, according to the Schwarz-Bayes information criterion. The second alternative model constrained sensitivity to magnitude to be equal for pairs of reinforcer-rate ratios that deviated from unity by proportionately equal amounts but in opposite directions. This model was more efficient than the common-magnitude-sensitivity model for 2 of the pigeons, but not for the other 3. An analysis of variance, carried out independently of the generalized-matching analysis, also showed a significant interaction between the effects of reinforcer rate and reinforcer magnitude on choice. On balance, these results suggest that the assumption of independence inherent in the matching approach cannot be maintained. Relative reinforcer rates and magnitudes do not control choice independently.

We investigated the effects that sequences of reinforcers obtained from the same response key have on local preference in concurrent variable-interval schedules with pigeons as subjects. With an overall reinforcer rate of one every 27 s, on average, reinforcers were scheduled dependently, and the probability that a reinforcer would be arranged on the same alternative as the previous reinforcer was manipulated. Throughout the experiment, the overall reinforcer ratio was 1:1, but across conditions we varied the average lengths of same-key reinforcer sequences by varying this conditional probability from 0 to 1. Thus, in some conditions, reinforcer locations changed frequently, whereas in others there tended to be very long sequences of same-key reinforcers. Although there was a general tendency to stay at the just-reinforced alternative, this tendency was considerably decreased in conditions where same-key reinforcer sequences were short. Some effects of reinforcers are at least partly to be accounted for by their signaling subsequent reinforcer locations.

Six pigeons were trained in a procedure in which sessions included seven unsignaled components, each offering two pecking keys, and each providing a potentially different reinforcer ratio between the two keys. Across conditions, various combinations of reinforcer ratios and reinforcer-magnitude ratios were used to create unequal reinforcer distributions between the two alternatives when averaged across a session. The results extended previous research using the same basic procedure that had included only reinforcer distributions symmetrical around 1:1. Data analyses suggested that the variables controlling choice operated at a number of levels: First, individual reinforcers had local effects on choice; second, sequences of successive reinforcers obtained at the same alternative (continuations) had cumulative effects; and, third, when these sequences themselves occurred with greater frequency, their effects further cumulated. A reinforcer obtained at the other alternative following a sequence of continuations (a discontinuation) had a large effect and apparently reset choice to levels approximating the sessional reinforcer ratio.

Five pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval schedules in a switching-key procedure. The overall rate of reinforcement was constant in all conditions, and the ratios of reinforcers obtainable on the two alternatives were varied over seven levels. Each condition remained in effect for 65 sessions, and the last 50 sessions of data from each condition were analyzed. The most recently obtained reinforcer had the largest effect on current preference, but each of the eight previously obtained reinforcers had a small measurable effect. These effects were larger when the reinforcer ratio was more extreme. A longer term effect of reinforcement was also evident, which changed as a function of the reinforcer ratio arranged. More local analyses showed regularities at a reinforcer-by-reinforcer level and large transient movements in preference toward the just-reinforced alternative immediately following reinforcers, followed by a return to stable levels that were related to the reinforcer ratio in effect. The present data suggest that the variables that control choice have both short- and long-term effects and that the short-term effects increased when the reinforcer ratios arranged were more extreme.