No abstract

A multiple chained schedule was used to compare the relative resistance to change of variable and fixed four-peck response sequences in pigeons. In one terminal link, a response sequence produced food only if it occurred infrequently relative to 15 other response sequences (vary). In the other terminal link, a single response sequence produced food (repeat). Identical variable-interval schedules operated in the initial links. During baseline, lower response rates generally occurred in the vary initial link, and similar response and reinforcement rates occurred in each terminal link. Resistance of responding to prefeeding and three rates of response-independent food delivered during the intercomponent intervals then was compared between components. During each disruption condition, initial- and terminal-link response rates generally were more resistant in the vary component than in the repeat component. During the response-independent food conditions, terminal-link response rates were more resistant than initial-link response rates in each component, but this did not occur during prefeeding. Variation (in vary) and repetition (in repeat) both decreased during the response-independent food conditions in the respective components, but with relatively greater disruption in repeat. These results extend earlier findings demonstrating that operant variation is more resistant to disruption than is operant repetition and suggest that theories of response strength, such as behavioral momentum theory, must consider factors other than reinforcement rate. The implications of the results for understanding operant response classes are discussed.

Experiment I investigated the effects of reinforcer magnitude on differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedule performance in three phases. In Phase 1, two groups of rats (n = 6 and 5) responded under a DRI. 72-s schedule with reinforcer magnitudes of either 30 or 300 microl of water. After acquisition, the water amounts were reversed for each rat. In Phase 2, the effects of the same reinforcer magnitudes on DRL 18-s schedule performance were examined across conditions. In Phase 3, each rat responded unider a DR1. 18-s schedule in which the water amotnts alternated between 30 and 300 microl daily. Throughout each phase of Experiment 1, the larger reinforcer magnitude resulted in higher response rates and lower reinforcement rates. The peak of the interresponse-time distributions was at a lower value tinder the larger reinforcer magnitude. In Experiment 2, 3 pigeons responded under a DRL 20-s schedule in which reinforcer magnitude (1-s or 6-s access to grain) varied iron session to session. Higher response rates and lower reinforcement rates occurred tinder the longer hopper duration. These results demonstrate that larger reinforcer magnitudes engender less efficient DRL schedule performance in both rats and pigeons, and when reinforcer magnitude was held constant between sessions or was varied daily. The present results are consistent with previous research demonstrating a decrease in efficiency as a function of increased reinforcer magnituide tinder procedures that require a period of time without a specified response. These findings also support the claim that DRI. schedule performance is not governed solely by a timing process.

The purpose of this experiment was to establish discriminative control of responding by an antecedent stimulus using differential punishment because the results of past studies on this topic have been mixed. Three adults with mental retardation who exhibited stereotypy not maintained by social consequences (i.e., automatic reinforcement) participated. For each subject, stereotypy occurred frequently in the presence of a stimulus correlated with nonpunishment of stereotypy and rarely, if ever, in the presence of a stimulus correlated with punishment of stereotypy. Latency measures showed that the antecedent stimulus correlated with punishment served as the discriminative stimulus for the suppression of stereotypy. These results are important insofar as they show that discriminative control by an antecedent stimulus develops with punishment, and because it sometimes may be desirable to establish such control of socially inappropriate behavior.