Adaptation of timing behavior to a regular change in criterion

Abstract

This study examined how operant behavior adapted to an abrupt but regular change in the timing of reinforcement. Pigeons were trained on a fixed interval (FI) 15-s schedule of reinforcement during half of each experimental session, and on an FI 45-s (Experiment 1), FI 60-s (Experiment 2), or extinction schedule (Experiment 3) during the other half. FI performance was well characterized by a mixture of two gamma-shaped distributions of responses. When a longer FI schedule was in effect in the first half of the session (Experiment 1), a constant interference by the shorter FI was observed. When a shorter FI schedule was in effect in the first half of the session (Experiments 1, 2, and 3), the transition between schedules involved a decline in responding and a progressive rightward shift in the mode of the response distribution initially centered around the short FI. These findings are discussed in terms of the constraints they impose to quantitative models of timing, and in relation to the implications for information-based models of associative learning.

Interval timing under a behavioral microscope: Dissociating motivational and timing processes in fixed-interval performance

“…In contrast, the shape parameter of the gamma distribution was not significantly affected by the schedule or by a decrease in motivation. Furthermore, the notion that latencies are generated by a timing mechanism is consistent with previous research showing that latencies account for the curvature of FI cumulative records (Gentry, Weiss, & Laties, 1983), are roughly proportional to the duration of the FI (Lowe, Harzem, & Spencer, 1979;Lowe & Wearden, 1981;Shull, 1971;Wearden, 1985;Zeiler & Powell, 1994), and track rapid within-session changes in the duration of the FI (Higa, 1997;Ludvig & Staddon, 2004;Sanabria & Oldenburg, 2014;Wynne, Staddon, & Delius, 1996).…”

Asymmetry in updating long-term memory for time

“…Furthermore, readaptation to a short duration after a shift to longer duration is very rapid (Higa and Tillou 2001), which stands in contrast to our results, which could be interpreted as a fast learning of a longer duration and/or slow readaptation to a shorter duration. Previously reported asymmetries in adaptation to changing FI schedules may be partly explained through the learned anticipation of upcoming shifts, due to the repetition of shifts (Sanabria and Oldenburg 2014).…”

Dynamics of Spatio-Temporal Binding in Rats

“…Animals can learn time fast (Davis et al, 1989;Bevins and Ayres, 1995;Balsam et al, 2002;Diaz-Mataix et al, 2013), and adapt rapidly (i.e. within a few sessions) to changes in temporal rules in a peak interval protocol (Lejeune et al, 1997;Guilhardi et al, 2005;Sanabria et al, 2014;Dallérac et al, 2017). Similarly, animals can also adapt quickly to changes in a spatial rule from session to session (Morris et al, 1986;Blanco et al, 2006).…”