Free-operant compounding of variable-interval and low-rate discriminative stimuli

On Response Strength and the Concept of Response Classes

Simon et al. (2020) argue that the concept of response strength is unnecessary and potentially harmful in that it misdirects behavior analysts away from more fruitful molar analyses. I defend the term as a useful summary of the effects of reinforcement and point particularly to its utility as an interpretive tool in making sense of complex human behavior under multiple control. Physiological data suggest that the concept is not an explanatory fiction, but strength cannot be simply equated with neural conductivity; interaction with competing behaviors must be considered as well. Decisions about appropriate scales of analysis require a clarification of terms. I suggest defining behavior solely in terms of its sensitivity to behavioral principles, irrespective of locus, magnitude, or observability. Furthermore, I suggest that the term response class be restricted to units that vary together in probability in part because of overlapping topography. In contrast, functional classes are united by common consequences; they vary together with respect to motivational variables but need not share formal properties and need not covary with acquisition and extinction contingencies.

Summation of responding maintained by fixed-interval schedules

A light and tone were separately correlated with responding maintained by fixed-interval schedules, in which the level of responding varied continuously throughout the duration of the interval. Responding during the presence of the single stimuli and their compound was compared during the successive segments of the interval. The following results were obtained: (1) more responses were emitted during compounding than were emitted during either stimulus alone in all segments of the interval; (2) increases in the number of responses across the interval during compounding paralleled increases during single-stimulus presentations. The sum of the responses emitted during the single stimuli was similar to the number of responses emitted during compounding, suggesting that the response tendencies correlated with the single stimuli combined in a summative or additive fashion.

Recognition by the pigeon of stimuli varying in two dimensions

Pigeons served in four experiments, each of which involved about 44,000 discrete 1.2-sec trials under steady-state conditions. The first experiment scaled a short segment of the visual wavelength continuum; this dimension was then combined in a conditional discrimination with each of three others; time after reinforcement, tone frequency, and line tilt. In the two-stimulus experiments, the birds' responses were reinforced in the presence of only one stimulus combination: "582 nm" together with "2 min after reinforcement", "3990 Hz", or "vertical line". Many other stimulus combinations also appeared equally often and went without reinforcement. The wavelength stimuli conformed to an equal-interval scale, and per cent response was generally linear with wavelength, when scaled on cumulative normal coordinates. The components of the compound stimulus were found to interact in a multiplicative fashion; when one component differed greatly from its reinforcement value, changes in the other component had relatively little effect. For the "time"-"wavelength" compound, this interaction appeared to be modified by the effects of set or attention. Certain response latency data are reported, and other combination rules are discussed.

Discrimination training and stimulus compounding: consideration of non-reinforcement and response differentiation consequences of S

In Exp. 1, four rats were trained on a two-component multiple schedule with tone and light each associated with different variable-interval schedules. Extinction in light-out no-tone, common to previous studies reporting additive summation to compounded discriminative stimuli, was omitted from training. In testing, the simultaneous presentation of tone and light controlled a response rate intermediate between that controlled by these stimuli presented singly. In Exp. 2, animals were trained on three-ply multiple schedules. While tone and light were each associated with variable-interval schedules for both groups, light-out no-tone signalled extinction for one and differential-reinforcement-of-behavior-other-than-bar-pressing for the other. This permitted response reduction during light-out no-tone to be viewed independently of non-reinforcement. Responding of both groups showed summation to tone plus light in testing, with the effect clearly larger for extinction-trained subjects. These experiments indicate that: (1) discrimination training afforded by extinction has been integral to additive summation previously reported, (2) response differentiation and non-reinforcement consequences of extinction training contribute to the magnitude of summation, and (3) summation and peak shift might be functionally related phenomena.

Inhibition and the stimulus control of operant behavior

A variety of methods, definitions, and theoretical notions that have been used in the study of inhibitory stimulus control were reviewed and evaluated. Preliminary data from several new operant methods were also described. It was proposed that future workers distinguish clearly between two forms of inhibitory control: (a) the learned power of a specific stimulus to reduce behavior, and (b) a dimensional effect, in which responding increases as values progressively more distant from the value of that specific stimulus along some dimension are presented (generalization gradient). Conclusions from several important recent studies were shown to be strongly dependent on the individual experimenter's criterion for deciding when a stimulus is inhibitory. The concept of inhibition seems a very valuable one for the field of operant behavior, and it deserves more attention than it has received in the past.

Humans' responses to novel stimulus compounds and the effects of training

Twenty-four college students participated in an experiment with stimulus compounds. Subjects learned to discriminate color stimuli that correlated with varying probabilities of reinforcement. Reinforcement consisted of points. For all subjects, two colors signaled a .80 reinforcement probability, and two others signaled a .20 probability. For compound-trained subjects, a fifth compound stimulus (composed of a high-probability color and a low-probability color) was correlated with a .10 reinforcement probability. During testing, interspersed probe trials required subjects to choose between two alternatives: a compound stimulus and either one of its constituent stimuli. Compound-untrained subjects preferred the compound over either individual stimulus, thus showing response summation. However, compound-trained subjects, having had experience with an exemplar compound, showed significantly lower choice proportions for a test compound, indicating that subjects' responding to novel stimulus compounds is modifiable by experience with a single similar compound.

Compounding of discriminative stimuli from the same and different sensory modalities

Rats' responding was maintained by fixed-interval schedules of reinforcement in the presence of a tone or two separate lights. The lights were either of low, moderate, or high intensity. Compounds of these single discriminative stimuli each maintained a greater frequency of response than did the single stimuli, and the compound composed of stimuli from different sensory modalities (light+tone) maintained a greater level of responding than did the compound composed of stimuli from the same sensory modality (light+light). Combining lights of different intensity had no differential effect on responding. However, in the second experiment, a compound composed of a light and a tone, each of greater intensity than the light and tone of another compound, initially maintained a higher frequency of response, demonstrating intensity effects during stimulus compounding when the increase in intensity occurs through the component stimuli. This intensity effect, however, was only transitory.

Compound stimulus control by discriminative stimuli associated with high and moderate response rates

Four rats received water on a fixed-ratio schedule for lever pressing in the presence of a tone (or light) stimulus and on a variable-interval schedule in the presence of a light (or tone) stimulus. Following stabilization of a high response rate during the fixed-ratio component and a moderate response rate during the variable-interval component, brief periods with the light and tone presented simultaneously but with no responses reinforced were inserted into the regular training schedule. Response rates during the compound stimuli were intermediate between the response rates controlled by the individual fixed-ratio and variable-interval associated stimuli.

Summation of conditioned suppression

Four rats were trained to suppress responses in the presence of two separately presented stimuli that signalled shock in a conditioned-suppression paradigm. The two stimuli that signalled shock were then presented simultaneously to evaluate the effect of stimulus compounding on conditioned suppression. Two rats were tested by presenting the compound conditioned stimulus while conditioned suppression was being maintained to the individual conditioned stimuli. The other two rats were tested by giving them random presentations of the compound conditioned stimulus and the single conditioned stimuli during extinction of conditioned suppression. All four rats showed greater suppression to the compound stimulus than to either stimulus presented alone.

Summation of response rates to discriminative stimuli associated with qualitatively different reinforcers

In Experiment I, a four-ply multiple schedule was used to study the effects on rate of responding in rats of food, water, and food and/or water reinforcement under different deprivation conditions. Food and water were associated separately with different stimuli, the combination of which was associated with food and water together, or with food or water randomly. Rates in the presence of the combined stimuli were consistently intermediate to the rates generated by the separate stimuli, a result seemingly incompatible with a "summation" hypothesis. Experiment II was a simplified systematic replication of Experiment I, verifying the major findings.