Determinants of contrast in the signal-key procedure: Evidence against additivity theory

Evaluating competing activities to enhance functional communication training during reinforcement schedule thinning

Arranging periods in which requests for reinforcement are denied in a multiple schedule may result in increased destructive behavior during these periods for individuals who receive functional communication training (FCT) as treatment for severe destructive behavior. Providing access to competing activities during periods of reinforcer unavailability has been shown to minimize destructive behavior. We evaluated methods to identify effective competing activities for use when thinning reinforcement availability in a multiple schedule and compared competing activities embedded within the multiple schedule using an alternating-treatments design. Results suggested at least one competing activity facilitated favorable treatment outcomes for each participant. We discuss building on this empirical approach to identify effective competing activities for use during reinforcement schedule thinning.

Three versions of the additive theories of behavioral contrast

The additive theories of behavioral contrast state that contrast will occur only when two types of responses interact during multiple schedules. Three more specific versions of the theories may be defined according to how they distinguish these two types of responses. A strong version physically distinguishes them. A second version distinguishes them according to the theoretical processes which control them. A weak version distinguishes them on the basis of the environmental relations which control them. Only the weak version of the theories is currently testable. The weak theory should be tested by establishing each of the two environmental relations independently and then combining them to assess their effect on behavior. Because this test is not usually performed, many of the results which have been taken to support or contradict the additive theories are actually ambiguous.

Another look at contrast in multiple schedules

Recent research on multiple schedule interactions is reviewed. Contrary to formulations that view contrast as the result of elicited behavior controlled by the stimulus-reinforcer contingency (e.g., additivity theory), the major controlling variable is the relative rate of reinforcement, which cannot be reduced to some combination of stimulus-reinforcer and response-reinforcer effects. Other recent theoretical formulations are also reviewed and all are found to face serious counterevidence. The best description of the available data continues to be in terms of the "context of reinforcement," but Herrnstein's (1970) formulation of the basis of such context effects appears to be inadequate. An alternative conception is provided by Catania's concept of "inhibition by reinforcement," by which rate of responding is inversely related to the average rate of reinforcement in the situation. Such a conception is related to Gibbon's recent scalar-expectancy account of autoshaping and Fantino's delay-reduction model of conditioned reinforcement, suggesting that a common set of principles determines several diverse conditioning phenomena. However, the empirical status of such a description remains uncertain, because recent evidence shows that schedule interactions are temporally asymmetric, depending primarily upon the conditions of reinforcement that follow a schedule component.

Behavioral contrast redux

Behavioral contrast is defined as a change in response rate during a stimulus associated with a constant reinforcement schedule, in inverse relation to the rates of reinforcement in the surrounding stimulus conditions. Contrast has at least two functionally separable components: local contrast, which occurs after component transition, and molar contrast. Local contrast contributes to molar contrast under some conditions, but not generally. Molar contrast is due primarily to anticipatory contrast. However, anticipatory contrast with respect to response rate has been shown to be inversely related to stimulus preference, which challenges the widely held view that contrast effects reflect changes in stimulus value owing to the reinforcement context. More recent data demonstrate that the inverse relation between response rate and preference with respect to anticipatory contrast is due to Pavlovian contingencies embedded in anticipatory contrast procedures. When those contingencies are weakened, anticipatory contrast and stimulus preference are positively related, thus reaffirming the view that the reinforcing effectiveness of a constant schedule is inversely related to the value of the context of reinforcement in which it occurs. The underlying basis of how the context of reinforcement controls reinforcement value remains uncertain, although clear parallels exist between contrast and the effects of contingency in both Pavlovian and operant conditioning.

Locating reward cue at response manipulandum (CAM) induces symptoms of drug abuse

Appetitive instrumental discrimination learning procedures provide for CAM (cue and manipulandum) when the reward cue (discriminative stimulus positively correlated with positive reinforcement) is located at the response manipulandum (object that when contacted or manipulated defines the performance of the instrumental response). Evidence reviewed shows that CAM induces excessive and compulsive instrumental responding relative to otherwise comparable non-CAM control procedures. In humans, symptoms of drug abuse are particularly likely when the drug-taking implement (response manipulandum at which instrumental drug-taking is directed) is also predictive of the drug's rewarding effects (reward cue). Evidence that the predictive relationship between a drug-taking implement and drug reward relates to drug abuse is reviewed, and implications for treatment and prevention are considered. CAM is related to neurobiological models of drug abuse that emphasize the role of the neurotransmitter dopamine (DA). CAM produces convergence of DA-mediated responding for conditioned reinforcement with DA mediation of psychomotor activation and incentive-motivational processes to yield reflexive cue-directed responding not observed in non-CAM controls.

Competition between stimulus-reinforcer contingencies and anticipatory contrast

Procedures used to study anticipatory contrast are conceptually similar to those used to study autoshaping, in that two target stimuli signal either higher or lower rates of reinforcement in the following components of the schedule. Despite this signal contingency, anticipatory contrast entails response rates that are higher to the target stimulus followed by the lower rate of reinforcement. To determine the relation between such effects and autoshaping, different variations of the procedure were used in which the signal contingency was presented in the absence of reinforcement in the target components themselves and in which the reinforcement schedules in the different following components were signaled by the same stimulus. Autoshaping effects of this signal contingency were demonstrated when no reinforcement was available during the target-component signals themselves. Intermediate patterns of behavior occurred when reinforcement was available during the target-component signals and when their different following schedules were correlated with the same stimulus. Attempts to isolate these signal and contrast effects functionally by using the signal-key procedure were unsuccessful. The results demonstrate that Pavlovian stimulus contingencies are in competition with the dynamics of anticipatory contrast, thus reducing its occurrence under some circumstances.

Behavioral contrast in fixed-interval components: effects of extinction-component duration

Seven albino rats were exposed to a multiple schedule of reinforcement in which the two components (fixed interval and extinction) alternated such that a presentation of the extinction component followed each fixed-interval reinforcement. In baseline sessions, the duration of the extinction component was constant and always one-third of the fixed-interval value. Probe sessions contained a probe segment in which the duration of the extinction component was increased; the response rate in fixed-interval components during the probe segment was compared with the response rate in the segments preceding and following the probe. The effect of increasing the duration of the extinction component was studied under three values of fixed interval: 30 s, 120 s, and 18 s, in three successive conditions. Response rate within fixed intervals was a direct function of duration of the extinction component. Pausing at the beginning of the fixed interval decreased as extinction duration increased. These effects were larger and more consistent for the shorter fixed-interval values (18 s and 30 s). These results indicate a functional relation between relative component duration and responding. For the component providing more frequent reinforcement, this could be stated as an inverse relationship between relative component duration and response rate. This relation is similar to findings regarding the ratio of trial and intertrial duration in Pavlovian conditioning procedures, and suggests that behavioral contrast may be related to Pavlovian contingencies underlying the multiple schedule.

Changeover delay effects on topographically tagged discriminative behavior

In a multiple variable-interval extinction schedule, pigeons' responses on an operant key were differentially reinforced in the presence of discriminative stimuli located on a signal key. Changeover delays of zero, one, two, or four seconds specified the time following a signal-key response within which an operant-key response was not reinforced. Systematic reduction of signal-key response rates with increasing changeover-delay duration indicated that signal-key responding was largely maintained by reinforcement of adventitious signal-key/operant-key response chains.