Choice between concurrent schedules

Local patterns of responding maintained by concurrent and multiple schedules

Local patterns of responding were studied when pigeons pecked for food in concurrent variable-interval schedules (Experiment I) and in multiple variable-interval schedules (Experiment II). In Experiment I, similarities in the distribution of interresponse times on the two keys provided further evidence that responding on concurrent schedules is determined more by allocation of time than by changes in local pattern of responding. Relative responding in local intervals since a preceding reinforcement showed consistent deviations from matching between relative responding and relative reinforcement in various postreinforcement intervals. Response rates in local intervals since a preceding changeover showed that rate of responding is not the same on both keys in all postchangeover intervals. The relative amount of time consumed by interchangeover times of a given duration approximately matched relative frequency of reinforced interchangeover times of that duration. However, computer simulation showed that this matching was probably a necessary artifact of concurrent schedules. In Experiment II, when component durations were 180 sec, the relationship between distribution of interresponse times and rate of reinforcement in the component showed that responding was determined by local pattern of responding in the components. Since responding on concurrent schedules appears to be determined by time allocation, this result would establish a behavioral difference between multiple and concurrent schedules. However, when component durations were 5 sec, local pattern of responding in a component (defined by interresponse times) was less important in determining responding than was amount of time spent responding in a component (defined by latencies). In fact, with 5-sec component durations, the relative amount of time spent responding in a component approximately matched relative frequency of reinforcement in the component. Thus, as component durations in multiple schedules decrease, multiple schedules become more like concurrent schedules, in the sense that responding is affected by allocation of time rather than by local pattern of responding.

Matching with a trio of concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement

A trio of concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement was arranged according to a changeover-key procedure, including a changeover delay of 1.5 sec. The three schedules provided a combined maximum reinforcement rate of 45 reinforcements per hour. With that restriction, the nine experimental conditions included several combinations of variable-interval schedules, sometimes including extinction. The pigeons matched relative response rate and relative time to relative reinforcement rate. Relative time appeared to match some-what better than relative response rate. Performance adjusted rapidly from one experimental condition to the next, whether the change involved two or all three schedules of the concurrent trio.

Choice between response rates

Three pigeons were required to peck a single key at a higher and a lower rate, corresponding to two classes of shorter and longer concurrently reinforced interresponse times. Food reinforcers arranged by a single variable-interval schedule were randomly allocated to the two reinforced interresponse times. The absolute durations of reinforced interresponse times were varied while the total reinforcements per hour was held constant and the relative duration, i.e., the relative reciprocal, of the shorter reinforcer class was held constant at 0.70. Preference for the higher rate of responding, as measured by the relative frequency of responses terminating interresponse times in the shorter reinforced class, depended on the absolute reinforced response rates. Preference for the higher reinforced rate increased from a level of near-indifference (0.50) at high reinforced response rates, through the matching level (0.70) at intermediate reinforced response rates, to a virtually exclusive preference (>0.90) at low reinforced response rates. These results resemble corresponding preference functions obtained with two-key concurrent-chains schedules and thereby provide another sense in which it may be said that interresponse-time distributions from interval schedules estimate preference functions for the component response rates corresponding to different classes of reinforced interresponse times.

Effects of random reinforcement sequences

Rats were exposed to a random sequence of reinforcement on two levers, such that there was no way to predict from the previous reinforcement which lever would deliver reinforcement next. The rats showed a tendency to repeat the choice that had just produced reinforcement, despite the absence of an overall contingency that differentially reinforced such repetition. However, this tendency decreased with continued exposure to the schedule. Runs of successive reinforcements on a lever increased the probability of pressing that lever, but only slightly, and only in the earlier phases of training. The more quickly a press was made after reinforcement the more likely it was to be on the lever that had delivered that reinforcement. Repetition of choice followed by reinforcement should be viewed as a naturally occurring behavior in the rat, but not necessarily as a behavior that will continue without differential reinforcement of repetition.

Preference for free choice over forced choice in pigeons

In a six-key chamber variable-interval initial links of concurrent-chain schedules operated on two lower white keys. Terminal links operated on four upper keys; green keys were correlated with fixed-interval reinforcement and red keys with extinction. Free-choice terminal links arranged three green keys and one red key; forced-choice terminal links arranged one green key and three red keys. Thus, terminal links were equivalent in number, variety, and information value (in bits) of the keylights. Preferences (relative initial-link rates) were studied both with location of the odd key color varying over successive terminal links and with the odd color fixed at key locations that had controlled either relatively high or relatively low terminal-link response rates. Free choice was consistently preferred to forced choice. Magnitude of preference did not vary systematically with terminal-link response rate or stimulus control by green and red keys. The origins of free-choice preference could be ontogenic or phylogenic: organisms may learn that momentarily preferred alternatives are more often available in free than in forced choice, and evolutionary contingencies may favor the survival of organisms that prefer free to forced choice.

Discriminated interresponse times: role of autoshaped responses

When discriminated interresponse-time (IRT) procedures have been used to assess preference relations among temporally extended operants, deviations from matching have been obtained. Using a yoked-control procedure, the present study found that key pecking in a discriminated IRT procedure has two sources of strength--that arising from the response-reinforcer contingency that is explicitly arranged, and that arising from a stimulus-reinforcer contingency that is a by-product of the explicitly arranged contingency. The key pecking of all lead birds, and that of 3 of the 4 birds exposed to a yoked autoshaping procedure, was controlled by the keylight that signaled the lead birds' criterion IRTs. Because stimulus control of key pecking by the keylight, whether autoshaped or discriminative, fosters deviations from matching, the discriminated IRT procedure does not provide an appropriate basis for conclusions about preference relations among IRTs.

Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice

Almost all of 103 sets of data from 23 different studies of choice conformed closely to the equation: log (B(1)/B(2)) = a log (r(1)/r(2)) + log b, where B(1) and B(2) are either numbers of responses or times spent at Alternatives 1 and 2, r(1) and r(2) are the rates of reinforcement obtained from Alternatives 1 and 2, and a and b are empirical constants. Although the matching relation requires the slope a to equal 1.0, the best-fitting values of a frequently deviated from this. For B(1) and B(2) measured as numbers of responses, a tended to fall short of 1.0 (undermatching). For B(1) and B(2) measured as times, a fell to both sides of 1.0, with the largest mode at about 1.0. Those experiments that produced values of a for both responses and time revealed only a rough correspondence between the two values; a was often noticeably larger for time. Statistical techniques for assessing significance of a deviation of a from 1.0 suggested that values of a between .90 and 1.11 can be considered good approximations to matching. Of the two experimenters who contributed the most data, one generally found undermatching, while the other generally found matching. The difference in results probably arises from differences in procedure. The procedural variations that lead to undermatching appear to be those that produce (a) asymmetrical pausing that favors the poorer alternative; (b) systematic temporal variation in preference that favors the poorer alternative; and (c) patterns of responding that involve changing over between alternatives or brief bouts at the alternatives.

Relative reinforcer magnitude under a nonindependent concurrent schedule of cocaine reinforcement in rhesus monkeys

Lever pressing by three rhesus monkeys was maintained under a two-lever concurrent schedule of cocaine reinforcement. Responding on one lever (constant-dose lever) produced a constant dose of 0.05 or 0.1 mg/kg/injection arranged according to a variable-interval 1-min schedule. Responding on the other lever (variable-dose lever) produced a comparison dose of cocaine (0.013 to 0.8 mg/kg/injection), also under a variable-interval 1-min schedule. The two variable-interval schedules were made nonindependent by arranging that the assignment of a reinforcer by one schedule inactivated the second schedule until the assigned reinforcer had been obtained. This modification ensured that the two cocaine doses were obtained with approximately equal frequency, regardless of the distribution of the subject's responding. Preference, indicated by relative response frequency on the variable-dose lever, was almost always for the larger of the doses and was a monotonic function of the comparison dose, except at the highest doses. Preferences at the highest comparison doses may have resulted from the low overall response rates exhibited at these doses. Relative response frequencies on the variable-dose lever roughly matched relative reinforcer magnitude (mg/kg/injection available on the variable-dose lever divided by the sum of mg/kg/injections available on each lever).