Abstract

Interval schedules of reinforcement are known to generate habitual behavior, the performance of which is less sensitive to revaluation of the earned reward and to alterations in the action-outcome contingency. Here we report results from experiments using different types of interval schedules of reinforcement in mice to assess the effect of uncertainty, in the time of reward availability, on habit formation. After limited training, lever pressing under fixed interval (FI, low interval uncertainty) or random interval schedules (RI, higher interval uncertainty) was sensitive to devaluation, but with more extended training, performance of animals trained under RI schedules became more habitual, i.e. no longer sensitive to devaluation, whereas performance of those trained under FI schedules remained goal-directed. When the press-reward contingency was reversed by omitting reward after pressing but presenting reward in the absence of pressing, lever pressing in mice previously trained under FI decreased more rapidly than that of mice trained under RI schedules. Further analysis revealed that action-reward contiguity is significantly reduced in lever pressing under RI schedules, whereas action-reward correlation is similar for the different schedules. Thus the extent of goal-directedness could vary as a function of uncertainty about the time of reward availability. We hypothesize that the reduced action-reward contiguity found in behavior generated under high uncertainty is responsible for habit formation.

Highlights

  • Instrumental behavior is governed by the contingency between the action and its outcome

  • Devaluation tests After 2 days of training on fixed interval (FI) or random interval (RI) 60 schedules, an early outcome devaluation test was conducted to determine if animals could learn the action-outcome relation under all the schedules

  • Summary and neurobiological implications In short, our results suggest that the reduced sensitivity to outcome devaluation and omission under RI schedules can be most parsimoniously explained by the reduced action-reward contiguity in behavior generated by such schedules

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Instrumental behavior is governed by the contingency between the action and its outcome. Studies have suggested that instrumental behavior can vary in the degree of goal-directedness When it is explicitly goal-directed, performance reflects the current value of the outcome and the action-outcome contingency. Given one action (e.g. lever pressing) and one reward (e.g. food pellet), interval schedules are known to promote habit formation while ratio schedules do not, even when they yield comparable rates of reward (Dickinson et al, 1983). In this respect they have been contrasted with ratio schedules, the other major class of reinforcement schedules, in which the rate of reinforcement is a monotonically increasing function of the rate of behavior. Under a random interval (RI) 60 schedule, the maximum reward rate is on average about one reward per minute, and cannot be increased no matter how quickly the animal presses the lever

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call