Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Mar;91(2):157-67.
doi: 10.1901/jeab.2009.91-157.

Single-sample discrimination of different schedules' reinforced interresponse times

Takayuki Tanno  1 , Alan Silberberg, Takayuki Sakagami
Affiliations

Single-sample discrimination of different schedules' reinforced interresponse times

Takayuki Tanno et al. J Exp Anal Behav. 2009 Mar.

Abstract

Food-deprived rats in Experiment 1 responded to one of two tandem schedules that were, with equal probability, associated with a sample lever. The tandem schedules' initial links were different random-interval schedules. Their values were adjusted to approximate equality in time to completing each tandem schedule's response requirements. The tandem schedules differed in their terminal links: One reinforced short interresponse times; the other reinforced long ones. Tandem-schedule completion presented two comparison levers, one of which was associated with each tandem schedule. Pressing the lever associated with the sample-lever tandem schedule produced a food pellet. Pressing the other produced a blackout. The difference between terminal-link reinforced interresponse times varied across 10-trial blocks within a session. Conditional-discrimination accuracy increased with the size of the temporal difference between terminal-link reinforced interresponse times. In Experiment 2, one tandem schedule was replaced by a random ratio, while the comparison schedule was either a tandem schedule that only reinforced long interresponse times or a random-interval schedule. Again, conditional-discrimination accuracy increased with the temporal difference between the two schedules' reinforced interresponse times. Most rats mastered the discrimination between random ratio and random interval, showing that the interresponse times reinforced by these schedules can serve to discriminate between these schedules.

Keywords: interresponse-time reinforcement; lever press; random interval; random ratio; rats; variable interval; variable ratio.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The proportion of correct choices to the comparison levers as a function of the absolute difference in the reinforced IRTs in s between Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 on the sample lever. Each subject's data are presented in a separate panel.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The proportion of correct choices to the comparison levers as a function of the difference in duration of two types of schedule on the sample lever (Schedule 2 minus Schedule 1).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Proportion of choices to Schedule 2 as a function of the duration of the IRT reinforced on the sample lever (top panel) and as a function of the duration of the IRI (bottom panel). The bin sizes of X-axis are 0.5 s in the top panel and 10 s in the bottom panel.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Relative frequency of an IRT in 0.1-s classes as a function of schedule type.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
The proportion of correct choices to the comparison levers as a function of the absolute difference in the reinforced IRTs in s between Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 on the sample lever for each of 4 rats. The closed-box points present data from Block 5, where the comparison was between RI and RR schedules.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
The proportion of correct choices to the comparison levers as a function of the difference in duration of two types of schedule on the sample lever (Schedule 2 minus Schedule 1). The closed points present data from Block 5, where the comparison was between RI and RR schedules.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Proportion of choices to Schedule 2 as a function of the duration of the IRT reinforced on the sample lever (top panel) and as a function of the duration of the IRI (bottom panel). The bin sizes of X-axis are 0.5 s in the top panel and 10 s in bottom panel.
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Relative frequency of an IRT in 0.1-s classes as a function of schedule type.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Baum W.M. Optimization and the matching law as accounts of instrumental behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1981;36:387–403. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Catania A.C, Matthews T.J, Silverman P.J, Yohalem R. Yoked variable-ratio and variable-interval responding in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1977;28:155–161. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ferster C.B, Skinner B.F. Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1957.
    1. Lattal K.A. Reinforcement contingencies as discriminative stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1975;23:241–246. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Peele D.B, Casey J, Silberberg A. Primacy of interresponse-time reinforcement in accounting for rate differences under variable-ratio and variable-interval schedules. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes. 1984;10:149–167.

LinkOut - more resources