An Exploration of Remote History Effects in Humans

Abstract

One group of undergraduates responded under a fixedratio (FR) 25 schedule and a second group responded under a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) 5-s schedule (first history phase). Both groups of subjects were then exposed to a differential-reinforcement-of-other-behavior (DRO) 5-s schedule (second history phase), and finally to fixed-interval (Fi) 5-s (Experiment 1), variable-interval (Vi) 5-s (Experiment 2), extinction, FR, and DRL (Experiment 3) schedules (history testing phase). Response rates under the extinction and the FR schedule in the history-testing phase were higher for subjects with a history of the FR schedule than for subjects with a DRL history. Such a systematic difference by remote histories was not observed when the Fi, Vi, and DRL schedules were in effect during testing.

An Exploration of Remote History Effects in Humans: II. The Effects Under Fixed-Interval, Variable-Interval, and Fixed-Ratio Schedules

“…In other experiments, by contrast, the effects appeared to differ depending on schedules in the testing condition, the final part of the sequence. Response rates for human participants who had been exposed first to an FR schedule and then to a DRO were higher than those of participants exposed first to a DRL schedule and then to a DRO when the rates were assessed under the FR schedule, but not when they were assessed under FI, VI, or DRL schedules (Okouchi, 2007). Cole (2001) and LeFrancois and Metzger (1993), moreover, reported that the responding of rats under FI schedules was affected by immediate FR schedule histories rather than by remote DRL schedule histories.…”

“…The FR testing schedule was selected because of its reliability. Previous experiments have found remote history effects under FR schedules (Okouchi, 2007;Weiner, 1982). Thus, the FR schedule was expected to allow an examination of whether the remote history effects obtained in the previous experiments could be replicated in the present experiment.…”

“…First, values of the schedules were set such that interreinforcer intervals (IRIs) became longer during the testing condition than during the immediate history condition. This practice was employed because previous post-hoc molecular analyses suggested that the remote history effects tended to occur when the obtained IRIs of the testing condition were longer than those of the immediate history condition (Okouchi, 2007). Under a testing condition during which IRIs are long, responding that was reinforced in the immediate history condition becomes nonreinforced.…”

“…498-502) 1 s < interresponse time (IRT) ≤ 2 s as an immediate history. Previous experiments of remote history effects have used FR (Cole, 2001;Weiner, 1969Weiner, , 1982, DRL (Cole, 2001;Weiner, 1982), or DRO (Okouchi, 2007;Weiner, 1982) schedules as immediate history schedules, each of which usually produces high-rate or low-rate responding. The 1 s < IRT ≤ 2 s pacing schedule, by contrast, can produce intermediate rates of responding.…”

“…Probe sessions under FR, VI, and FR schedules were interspersed among baseline sessions of the 1 s < IRT ≤ 2 s pacing schedule. Though not common, some studies of history effects have used drugs (Barrett, 1977;Cohen, Pedersen, Kinney, & Myers, 1994;Egli & Thompson, 1989;Nader & Thompson, 1987Poling, Krafft, & Chapman, 1980;Urbain et al, 1978), drinking water (Johnson, Bickel, Higgins, & Morris, 1991), prefeeding (Cohen et al, 1994;Doughty, Cirino, Mayfield, Da Silva, Okouchi, & Lattal, 2005), and schedules (Okouchi, 2003(Okouchi, , 2007 as probes, and have found some effects that were not observed during the baseline (Barrett, 1977;Egli & Thompson, 1989;Johnson et al, 1991;Okouchi, 2007). The probe technique, of course, cannot identify longevity of the effects but permits a replication of multiple conditions economically (Sidman, 1960, pp.…”