Temporal Memory of Interfood Interval Distributions with the Same Mean and Variance

Church, Russell M.; Lacourse, Donna M.

doi:10.1006/lmot.2000.1076

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nonetheless, our observation that rats' magazine responses decrease as time elapses during an exponential CS is not without precedent. Kirkpatrick and Church (2000) and Church and Lacourse (2001) reported that rats' response rates to an exponentially varying CS were highest immediately after CS onset, and decreased as time elapsed during the CS. There is one important feature that distinguishes the experiments in these two studies and the present experiments from the earlier studies that reported stable response rates to exponentially varying CSs and increasing response rates to uniformly varying CSs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is one important feature that distinguishes the experiments in these two studies and the present experiments from the earlier studies that reported stable response rates to exponentially varying CSs and increasing response rates to uniformly varying CSs. The experiments we present here, as well as those by Kirkpatrick and Church (2000) and Church and Lacourse (2001), measured responses during a discrete CS that was presented for a variable duration and followed by reinforcement, and each CS presentation was separated by a variable inter-trial interval. In contrast, all of the other studies discussed above used a continuous conditioning schedule with no discrete CS, and response rates were measured across the full length of each interreinforcement interval.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Response rates track the history of reinforcement times.

Harris¹,

Gharaei²,

Pincham³

2011

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When conditioning involves a consistent temporal relationship between the conditioned stimulus (CS) and unconditioned stimulus (US), the expression of conditioned responses within a trial peaks at the usual time of the US relative to the CS. Here we examine the temporal profile of responses during conditioning with variable CS-US intervals. We conditioned stimuli with either uniformly distributed or exponentially distributed random CS-US intervals. In the former case, the frequency of each CS-US interval within a specified range is uniform but the momentary probability of the US (the hazard function) increases as time elapses during the trial; with the latter distribution, short CS-US intervals are more frequent than longer intervals, but the momentary probability of the US is constant across time within the trial. We report that, in a magazine approach paradigm, rats' response rates remained stable as time elapses during the CS when the CS-US intervals were uniformly distributed, whereas their response rates declined when the CS-US intervals were exponentially distributed. In other words, the profile of responding during the CS matched the frequency distribution of the US times, not the momentary probability of the US during the CS. These results are inconsistent with real-time associative models, which predict that associative strength tracks the momentary probability of the US, but may provide support for timing models of conditioning in which conditioned responding is tied to remembered times of reinforcement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response rates track the history of reinforcement times.

Harris¹,

Gharaei²,

Pincham³

2011

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even in single and mixed schedules in which the time between consecutive reinforcers varies, the relation between one reinforcer and the next exerts some control over postreinforcer pause duration. Pauses increase with the minimum interreinforcer interval (e.g., Church & Lacourse, ; Schneider, ; Todorov, de Carvalho, Couto, da Cruz, & da Cunha, ), and when the time between reinforcers increases or decreases systematically with the number of reinforcers obtained, so too does the duration of the pause (Church & Lacourse, ). Finally, Williams () reported that performance in one component of a multiple schedule is affected by the contingencies in the following component, and Nevin () showed that resistance to change in a multiple‐schedule component was positively related to the following component reinforcer rate.…”

Section: Interreinforcer‐level Analysis: Effects Of Reinforcer Sequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Control by reinforcers across time and space: A review of recent choice research

Cowie

Davison

2016

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reinforcers affect behavior. A fundamental assumption has been that reinforcers strengthen the behavior they follow, and that this strengthening may be context-specific (stimulus control). Less frequently discussed, but just as evident, is the observation that reinforcers have discriminative properties that also guide behavior. We review findings from recent research that approaches choice using nontraditional procedures, with a particular focus on how choice is affected by reinforcers, by time since reinforcers, and by recent sequences of reinforcers. We also discuss how conclusions about these results are impacted by the choice of measurement level and display. Clearly, reinforcers as traditionally considered are conditionally phylogenetically important to animals. However, their effects on behavior may be solely discriminative, and contingent reinforcers may not strengthen behavior. Rather, phylogenetically important stimuli constitute a part of a correlated compound stimulus context consisting of stimuli arising from the organism, from behavior, and from physiologically detected environmental stimuli. Thus, the three-term contingency may be seen, along with organismic state, as a correlation of stimuli. We suggest that organisms may be seen as natural stimulus-correlation detectors so that behavioral change affects the overall correlation and directs the organism toward currently appetitive goals and away from potential aversive goals. As a general conclusion, both historical and recent choice research supports the idea that stimulus control, not reinforcer control, may be fundamental.

show abstract

“…The focus on fixed intervals may fail to disclose important features of the timing system, because it has evolved under conditions of temporal uncertainty. In a few studies, variable-intervalperformance has been examined, and these studies have indicated that exponentialrandom intervals result in a relativelyconstant rate of responding as a function of time (Catania & Reynolds, 1968;Church & Lacourse, 2001;Kirkpatrick & Church, 2000b;LaBarbera & Church, 1974;Libby & Church, 1975;Lund, 1976), in contrast to the increasing response rate observed with fixed intervals.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tracking of the expected time to reinforcement in temporal conditioning procedures

Kirkpatrick

Church

2003

Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In one experiment, the rate and pattern of responding (head entry into the food cup) under different distributions of intervals between food deliveries were examined. Separate groups of rats received fixed-time (45, 90, 180, or 360 sec), random-time (45, 90, 180, or 360 sec), or tandem fixed-time (45 or 90 sec) random-time (45 or 90 sec) schedules of reinforcement. Schedule type affected the pattern of responding as a function of time, whereas mean interval duration affectedthe mean rate of responding. Responses occurred in bouts with characteristics that were invariant across conditions. Packet theory, which assumes that the momentary probability of bout occurrence is negatively related to the conditional expected time remaining until the next reinforcer, accurately predicted global and local measures of responding. The success of the model advances the prediction of multiple measures of responding across different types of time-based schedules. KIRKPATRICK AND CHURCHgiven that food, has not yet occurred (Catania & Reynolds, 1968). (See Anger, 1956, for the application of the hazard function to interresponse time [IRT] distributionsin DRL schedules.) As is shown in Figure 1, the hazard function for a random interval is constant over time and, therefore, could explain the relatively constant rate of responding that is observed. However, a different distribution form is required for fixed-interval performance, because the hazard function does not map onto response rate. One could use the hazard function with added variability to explain both fixed-and random-interval performance, but this would lead to a departure from constancy in the random-interval case and, therefore, would not accurately fit the data.A third proposal has been to assume that temporal control over behavior decreases as variability increases, so that fixed intervals exhibit strong control but (exponential) random intervals exhibit no control over behavior (Lund, 1976).All three approaches propose different processes in random and fixed intervals. This leads to the unparsimonious conclusion that there may be multiple timing systems, each tuned to a different distribution form. A simpler alternative would be to assume that temporal performance is controlled by some common aspect of different distribution forms.In addition to an examination of the effects of variability on responding, the present experiment provided an as- EXPECTED TIME TO REINFORCEMENT 5 sessment of the role of mean interval duration. Interval duration usually is negatively related to measures of response rate or strength (Bitterman, 1964;Black, 1963;de Villiers & Herrnstein, 1976;Gibbon, Baldock, Locurto, Gold, & Terrace, 1977;Herrnstein, 1970;Salafia, Terry, & Daston, 1975;Schneiderman & Gormezano, 1964). This relationship is often reported to be nonlinear in form (e.g., Herrnstein, 1970). Predictions of the rate of responding have traditionally required a separate explanation from predictions of the pattern of responding in interval-based procedures. For example, Herrnstein's ...

show abstract

Temporal Memory of Interfood Interval Distributions with the Same Mean and Variance

Cited by 16 publications

References 22 publications

Response rates track the history of reinforcement times.

Response rates track the history of reinforcement times.

Control by reinforcers across time and space: A review of recent choice research

Tracking of the expected time to reinforcement in temporal conditioning procedures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About