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.

Six pigeons worked on concurrent exponential variable-interval schedules in which the relative frequency of food deliveries for responding on the two alternatives reversed at a fixed time after each food delivery. Across conditions, the point of food-ratio reversal was varied from 10 s to 30 s, and the overall reinforcer rate was varied from 1.33 to 4 per minute. The effect of rate of food delivery and food-ratio-reversal time on choice and response rates was small. In all conditions, postfood choice was toward the locally richer key, regardless of the last-food location. Unlike the local food ratio which changed in a stepwise fashion, local choice changed according to a decelerating monotonic function, becoming substantially less extreme than the local food ratio soon after food delivery. This deviation in choice appeared to result from the birds' inaccurate discrimination of the time of food deliveries; local choice was described well by a model that assumed that log response ratios matched food ratios that were redistributed across surrounding time bins with mean time t and a constant coefficient of variation. We suggest that local choice is controlled by the likely availability of food in time, and that choice matches the discriminated log of the ratio of food rates across time since the last food delivery.

Reinforcers affect behavior. A fundamental assumption has been that reinforcers strengthen the behavior they follow, and that this strengthening may be context-specific (stimulus control). Less frequently discussed, but just as evident, is the observation that reinforcers have discriminative properties that also guide behavior. We review findings from recent research that approaches choice using nontraditional procedures, with a particular focus on how choice is affected by reinforcers, by time since reinforcers, and by recent sequences of reinforcers. We also discuss how conclusions about these results are impacted by the choice of measurement level and display. Clearly, reinforcers as traditionally considered are conditionally phylogenetically important to animals. However, their effects on behavior may be solely discriminative, and contingent reinforcers may not strengthen behavior. Rather, phylogenetically important stimuli constitute a part of a correlated compound stimulus context consisting of stimuli arising from the organism, from behavior, and from physiologically detected environmental stimuli. Thus, the three-term contingency may be seen, along with organismic state, as a correlation of stimuli. We suggest that organisms may be seen as natural stimulus-correlation detectors so that behavioral change affects the overall correlation and directs the organism toward currently appetitive goals and away from potential aversive goals. As a general conclusion, both historical and recent choice research supports the idea that stimulus control, not reinforcer control, may be fundamental.

No abstract

When the availability of reinforcers depends on time since an event, time functions as a discriminative stimulus. Behavioral control by elapsed time is generally weak, but may be enhanced by added stimuli that act as additional time markers. The present paper assessed the effect of brief and continuous added stimuli on control by time-based changes in the reinforcer differential, using a procedure in which the local reinforcer ratio reversed at a fixed time after the most recent reinforcer delivery. Local choice was enhanced by the presentation of the brief stimuli, even when the stimulus change signalled only elapsed time, but not the local reinforcer ratio. The effect of the brief stimulus presentations on choice decreased as a function of time since the most recent stimulus change. We compared the ability of several versions of a model of local choice to describe these data. The data were best described by a model which assumed that error in discriminating the local reinforcer ratio arose from imprecise discrimination of reinforcers in both time and space, suggesting that timing behavior is controlled not only by discrimination elapsed time, but by discrimination of the reinforcer differential in time.

No abstract

Resurgence is the recurrence of a previously reinforced and then extinguished behavior induced by the extinction of another more recently reinforced behavior. Resurgence provides insight into behavioral processes relevant to treatment relapse of a range of problem behaviors. Resurgence is typically studied across three phases: (1) reinforcement of a target response, (2) extinction of the target and concurrent reinforcement of an alternative response, and (3) extinction of the alternative response, resulting in the recurrence of target responding. Because each phase typically occurs successively and spans multiple sessions, extended time frames separate the training and resurgence of target responding. This study assessed resurgence more dynamically and throughout ongoing training in 6 pigeons. Baseline entailed 50-s trials of a freeoperant psychophysical procedure, resembling Phases 1 and 2 of typical resurgence procedures. During the first 25 s, we reinforced target (left-key) responding but not alternative (right-key) responding; contingencies reversed during the second 25 s. Target and alternative responding followed the baseline reinforcement contingencies, with alternative responding replacing target responding across the 50 s. We observed resurgence of target responding during signaled and unsignaled probes that extended trial durations an additional 100 s in extinction. Furthermore, resurgence was greater and/or sooner when probes were signaled, suggesting an important role of discriminating transitions to extinction in resurgence. The data were well described by an extension of a stimulus-control model of discrimination that assumes resurgence is the result of generalization of obtained reinforcers across space and time. Therefore, the present findings introduce novel methods and quantitative analyses for assessing behavioral processes underlying resurgence.

The extent to which a stimulus exerts control over behavior depends largely on its informativeness. However, when reinforcers have discriminative properties, they often exert less control over behavior than do other less reliable stimuli such as elapsed time. We investigated why less reliable cues in the present often overshadow stimulus control by more reliable cues presented in the recent past, by manipulating the reliability and duration of stimulus presentations. Five pigeons worked on a modified concurrent schedule in which the location of the response that produced the last reinforcer was a discriminative stimulus for the likely time and location of the next reinforcer. In some conditions, either the location of the previous reinforcer, or the location of the next reinforcer, was signaled by a red key light. This stimulus was either Brief, occurring for 10 s starting a fixed time after the most recent reinforcer, or Extended, being present at all times between food deliveries. Brief and Extended stimuli that signaled the same information had a similar effect on choice when they were present, but control by Brief stimuli weakened as time since stimulus offset elapsed. Control was divided among stimuli in the present and recent past according to the apparent reliability of the information signaled about the next reinforcer. More reliable stimuli in the present degraded, but did not erase, control by less reliable stimuli presented in the recent past. Thus, we conclude that less reliable stimuli in the present control behavior to a greater degree than do more reliable stimuli in the recent past because these more reliable stimuli are forgotten, and hence their relation to the likely availability of food cannot be discriminated.