Three rats were exposed to a second-order schedule in which fixed-interval components ended either with food or with a brief stimulus that was never paired with food. Food and the brief stimulus occurred in a random sequence (variable-ratio 2 overall schedule). Another three rats were exposed to a similar second-order schedule, the only difference being that the food or the stimulus was presented independently of operant behavior (fixed-time components). The three rats exposed to the fixed-interval components licked at a water spout after each food presentation. These rats also licked in the intervals after the brief stimulus. Although the discriminative properties of food and of the brief stimulus were identical in relation to subsequent reinforcement, licking after the stimulus was less than after food. The three rats exposed to the second-order schedules with fixedtime components also licked at the water spout after food, but these rats did not lick consistently after brief stimulus presentations.Key words: schedule-induced polydipsia, second-order schedules, nonpaired stimuli, fixedinterval components, fixed-time components, licking, lever pressing, ratsIf food-deprived rats are exposed to schedules of intermittent reinforcement, they typically ingest excessive quantities of water after each reinforcer if offered the opportunity to do so (Falk, 1961a). It has been suggested that this excessive drinking is an extreme example of postprandial drinking resulting, for example, from such factors as a dry mouth (e.g., Stein, 1964;Teitelbaum, 1966). Falk (1969), however, argued that this schedule-induced polydipsia is an example of a distinctive class of behavior, which he termed adjunctive. He suggested that adjunctive behavior is "psychogenic", and that one important condition for its occurrence is a temporarily low probability of reinforcement. The delivery of a food reinforcer in many intermittent schedules has discriminative properties resulting from the low probability of further reinforcement for some period of licking at a water spout. In simple schedules, the effects of food reinforcement in producing a dry mouth and in signalling a temporarily low probability of further reinforcement are confounded. The use of second-order schedules of reinforcement, however, may make it possible to isolate the contribution of these factors in inducing licking. Kelleher (1966) defined a second-order schedule as one in which the behavior specified by a sclhedule is treated as a unit that is itself reinforced according to some schedule of primary reinforcement. A second-order schedule in which a fixed-interval (FI) component is reinforced by a fixed-ratio (FR) overall schedule is conventionally designated FR (FI) (Kelleher, 1966). In brief-stimulus second-order schedules, completion of the component schedule is accompanied by delivery of a reinforcer such as food, or by delivery of a brief stimulus such as a flash of light, which may or may not also be delivered when food is presented. In a second-order schedule, as in ...
Three pigeons were exposed to a second-order schedule in which the behavior specified by a fixed-interval component schedule was reinforced according to a ratio overall schedule. The completion of components not followed by food was signalled by a brief stimulus never paired with food. Food and the stimulus occurred in a random sequence or in fixed alternation, but the overall schedules (variable ratio 2 or fixed ratio 2) ensured that an equal number of food and brief-stimulus presentations occurred in each session. The control exerted by the food and by the brief stimulus was measured by overall response rates, mean pauses, frequency distributions of pauses, and response patterning across components. In general, the stimulus controlled patterns of behavior more similar to those controlled by food when food and the stimulus occurred in a random sequence than when they occurred in fixed alternation.Key words: second-order schedules, fixed-interval components, nonpaired brief stimuli, schedule control, conditioned reinforcement, omission effect, key peck, pigeons Kelleher (1966b) 1972). The study of second-order schedules with these brief stimuli is important in the investigation of conditioned reinforcement, because this procedure enables a clear demonstration that a previously neutral stimulus can acquire the power to act like a primary reinforcer in maintaining appropriate schedulecontrolled patterns of responding over long periods of time. The effects of brief nonpaired stimuli in second-order schedules are more equivocal, however. Although several reports have suggested that nonpaired stimuli do not control behavior similar to that controlled by food (e
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.