Changeover Key Research Articles

TRANSFER TESTS OF STIMULUS VALUE IN CONCURRENT CHAINS

We report two experiments that use transfer tests to investigate whether in concurrent chains the value of a terminal‐link stimulus is affected by the alternate terminal link. In Experiment 1, two groups of pigeons were trained on multiple concurrent‐chains schedules in which switching between the schedules was via pecking a changeover key. For one group, the terminal links were fixed‐interval 8 s versus fixed‐interval 16 s in one component and fixed‐interval 16 s versus fixed‐interval 32 s in the other component. For a second group, the terminal links were variable‐interval 10 s versus variable‐interval 20 s in one component and variable‐interval 20 s versus variable‐interval 40 s in the other. After sufficient baseline training had been given so that performances had stabilized, transfer tests were conducted in which the two chains with equal terminal‐link schedules were presented together as a new concurrent pair. For 6 of the 7 subjects, initial‐link responding changed fairly rapidly during the test in the manner predicted if the values of the terminal links were equal. In Experiment 2, pigeons were trained on multiple concurrent chains using a two‐key procedure, and the terminal links were the same variable‐interval schedules as in Experiment 1. After baseline training, transfer tests were conducted that assessed (a) the relative reinforcing strength of the terminal‐link stimuli in a novel initial‐link situation and (b) the relative ability of those stimuli to evoke responding. The data from the reinforcing strength test were consistent with those from Experiment 1, but those from the evocation strength test were not. Although this discrepancy shows that responding in transfer tests is not solely a function of stimulus value, the results from both experiments suggest, overall, that value is determined by the stimulus—reinforcer relation independently of the alternative terminal link.

MAXIMIZING VERSUS MATCHING ON CONCURRENT VARIABLE-INTERVAL SCHEDULES

Maximization and matching predictions were examined for a time-based analogue of the concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedule. One alternative was a variable interval whose time base operated relatively independent of the schedule chosen, and the other was a discontinuous variable interval for which timing progressed only when selected. Pigeons switched between schedules by pecking a changeover key. The maximization hypothesis predicts that subjects will show a bias toward the discontinuous variable interval and undermatching; however the obtained results conformed closely to the predictions of the matching law. Finally, a quantitative comparison was made of the bias and sensitivity estimates obtained in published concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio analogue studies. Results indicated that only the ratio-based analogue of the concurrent variable interval variable ratio studied by Green, Rachlin, and Hanson (1983) produced significant bias toward the variable-ratio alternative and undermatching, as predicted by reinforcement maximization.

Scaling of events spaced in time

Pigeons were trained to peck on a key, which could be lit by red or green light, and produce feeder-light stimuli intermittently. On some trials, food followed the fourth feeder flash providing the key color was red, while on other trials food followed the sixteenth flash providing the color was green. The change in color from red to green was produced by a peck to a second, changeover key. Pigeons typically responded in the presence of red until four or more flashes occured and then, if food had not been delivered, changed the main-key color and responded on the green key. Following training, the variable-interval schedule arranging-feeder light events was changed to longer and shorter values to alter the amount of time (and number of responses) between events. Data from these test days indicate that the change from red to green was influenced by the number of events, but also by the time elapsed and/or responses emitted since the onset of a trial. The results suggest multiple sources of related information and stimulus control when events and behavior occur over time.

Noncontingent and contingent no-choice intervals and concurrent performance

Pigeons responded to changeover-key concurrent variable-interval variable-interval reinforcement schedules while there were intervals during which the changeover key was inoperative (no-choice intervals). In Experiment 1, a multiple schedule on the changeover key signaled choice and no-choice intervals. All subjects showed near-perfect discrimination during initial discrimination training and rapid reacquisition of discrimination following contingency reversals. In Experiment 2, the onset of no-choice intervals was unsignaled and contingent on interchangeover time. The temporal distribution of changeover-key responses conformed to the temporal distribution of choice intervals. The results of both experiments suggest that changeover responding is modifiable as a function of its immediate consequences. The results of Experiment 2, in particular, suggest that time or some correlate of time since the last changeover response can determine subsequent changeover behavior.

DELAY OR RATE OF FOOD DELIVERY AS A DETERMINER OF RESPONSE RATE

PIGEONS WERE CONFRONTED WITH TWO KEYS: a green food key and a white changeover key. Food became available for a peck to the green key after variable intervals of time (mean = 113 seconds). A single peck on the changeover key changed the color of the food key to red for a fixed period of time during which the timing of the variable-interval schedule in green was suspended and the switching option eliminated and after which the conditions associated with green were reinstated. In Experiment 1 a single food presentation was obtainable during each red-key period after a minimum delay timed from the switch. This delay and the duration of the red-key period were held constant during a condition but varied between conditions (delay = 2.5, 7.5, 15, or 30 seconds; red-period duration = 30, 60, 120, 240, or 480 seconds). In Experiment 2 additional food presentations were scheduled during a 240-second red-key period with the delay to the first food delivery held constant at 30 seconds, and the delays to later food deliveries varied over conditions. Considering the data from both experiments, the rate of switching to red was a decreasing function of the delay to the first food, the delay to the second food, and perhaps the delay to the third food after a switch. There was no clear evidence that the rate of food in the red-key period made an independent contribution. The ordering of response rates among conditions was consistent with the view that each food presentation after a response adds an incremental effect to the rate of the response and that each food presentation's contribution is a decreasing function of its delay timed from the response.

CHOICE: EFFECTS OF CHANGEOVER SCHEDULES ON CONCURRENT PERFORMANCE

The components of concurrent schedules were separated temporally by placing interval schedules on the changeover key. The rates of responding on both the main and changeover keys were examined as a function of the reinforcement rates. In the first experiment, the sensitivity of main-key performance to changing reinforcement rates was inversely related to the temporal separation of components, and changeover performance was monotonically related to the ratio of the reinforcement rates. In the second experiment, when the ratio of the reinforcement rates was scheduled to remain constant while the frequency of reinforcement was varied, changeover performance did not remain constant. A "sampling" interpretation of changeover responding was proposed and subsequently tested in a third experiment where extinction was always scheduled in one component and the frequency of reinforcement was varied in the second component. It was concluded that changeover performance can be interpreted using molar measures of reinforcement and that animals sample activities available to them at rates which are controlled by relative reinforcement rates.

LOCAL RESPONSE‐RATE CONSTANCY ON CONCURRENT VARIABLE‐INTERVAL SCHEDULES OF REINFORCEMENT

Concurrent variable-interval schedules were arranged with a main key that alternated in color and schedule assignment, along with a changeover key on which a small fixed ratio was required to changeover. Acceptable matching was observed with pigeons in two replications, but there was a tendency toward overmatching. Local response rates were found to differ for unequal schedules of a concurrent pair: local response rate was greater for the variable-interval schedule with the smaller average interreinforcement interval, but qualifications based on an interresponse-time analysis were discussed. In a second experiment, two 3-minute variable-interval schedules were arranged concurrently, and the experimental variable was the changeover procedure: either a changeover delay was incurred by each changeover or a small fixed ratio on a changeover key was required to complete a changeover. Changeover delays of 2 and 5 seconds were compared with a fixed-ratio changeover of five responses. The response output on the main key (associated with the variable-interval schedules) was greater when a changeover delay was arranged than when a fixed ratio was required to changeover. A detailed analysis of stripchart records showed that a 2-second delay generated an increased response rate for 3 seconds after a changeover, while the fixed-ratio requirement generated an increased rate during the first second only, followed by a depressed response rate for 2 seconds.

Transfer of a response controlling stimulus duration across discrimination problems

In the acquisition phase, pigeons learned to peck at a changeover key to shorten the duration of S− but not of S+ presented on the food key in a discrimination problem. In the transfer phase, the significance of S+ and S− was changed through extinction of both, equal reinforcement, or discrimination reversal, while the changeover key was not available. Transfer tests then showed appropriate modification of the changeover response. Similar transfer was demonstrated across orthogonal stimulus dimensions. Further analytic studies showed that this transfer of the changeover response did not depend upon mediation due to differential response rates to the food key. This research strategy enriches the study of the “second learning process” by providing an indicator of stimulus control in all phases of the procedure. Direct transfer between different problems also indicates that discriminative stimuli, although physically dissimilar, have the same “psychological value” for the subject.

EFFECTS ON CONCURRENT PERFORMANCES OF A STIMULUS CORRELATED WITH REINFORCER AVAILABILITY1

A multiple schedule was arranged in which each component consisted of two, concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. A changeover-key procedure was used, and the components of the multiple schedule were distinguished (initially) by the color of the changeover key. During one component of the multiple schedule, the availability of a reinforcer arranged by one of the variable-interval schedules was marked by an exteroceptive stimulus, provided that that variable-interval schedule was not at the time assigned to the main key. During the other component of the multiple schedule, no reinforcer-correlated stimuli were ever presented. During the latter component of the multiple schedule, the distribution of responses and time for the concurrent variable-interval schedules suggested control by the distribution of reinforcements. During the former component, most main-key responses were emitted on the key in the presence of which reinforcer-correlated stimuli were presented. Changeover rate in the presence of that key color was depressed. The discriminative control over the changeover was easily established and was reversible.

Effects of amphetamine on choice behavior of pigeons.

Key-pecking behavior of three pigeons was maintained by concurrent variable-interval, variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. Dose-response curves of amphetamine on four operants involved in the choice situation were obtained. None of the doses of amphetamine studied produced any rate-increasing effect on responding, irrespective of the differences in control baseline rates. Responding at the changeover key was relatively more depressed than main-key responding in spite of occuring at lower rates in non-drug conditions.

PEAK SHIFT IN CONCURRENT SCHEDULES1

Pigeons were exposed to two keys, a main key and a changeover key. Initially non-differential training was given in which pecking the main key was reinforced on a variable-interval 2-min schedule when the key displayed the first stimulus, a black line on a blue background, and was reinforced on an identical but independent variable-interval 2-min schedule when the key displayed a plain blue stimulus. Later, differential training was given in which pecking the main key was reinforced on a variable-interval 2-min schedule when the first stimulus was displayed; and was reinforced on a variable-interval 10-min schedule when a second stimulus, a black line of another orientation on a blue background, was displayed. During non-differential and differential training, each peck on the changeover key changed the stimulus on the main key. Generalization tests were given before and after the differential training. These consisted of presentations on the main key of seven orientations of the black line on the blue background, including the first and second stimuli, with no reinforcements being given. Changeover-key pecks changed the stimuli on the main key. Generalization gradients were obtained using three measures: time spent, responses, and response rate in the presence of each test stimulus. Typically, maximum values on these measures occurred to stimuli away from the first in a direction opposite the second stimulus, and minimum values occurred to stimuli away from the second in a direction opposite the first.

INHIBITORY STIMULUS CONTROL IN CONCURRENT SCHEDULES1

Six pigeons were exposed to two keys, a main key and a changeover key. Pecking the main key was reinforced on a variable-interval 5-min schedule when the key was blue and never reinforced when the key displayed a vertical line on a blue background. Each peck on the changeover key changed the stimulus displayed on the main key. Each subject was given two generalization tests, consisting of presentations on the main key of six orientations of the line on the blue background, with no reinforcements being given. In one test changeover-key pecks changed the stimulus; in the other test the changeover key was covered and the experimenter controlled stimulus changes. Both responses to the six stimuli and time spent in the presence of the stimuli gave U-shaped gradients when the changeover key was operative. With most subjects, absolute rates of responding to each stimulus produced unsystematic gradients, whether or not the changeover key was operative.