Search

We describe an interresponse-time analysis of performance on a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 72-s schedule. This analysis compares the obtained interresponse-time distribution of individual rats to a corresponding random interresponse-time distribution. The random interresponse-time distribution is a negative exponential probability function; it predicts the relative distribution of interresponse times if the rat emitted the same number of responses randomly (i.e., with a constant probability) with respect to time. The analysis provides quantitative measures of peak location and dispersion of the interresponse times toward random performance. In Experiment 1, an unexpected outcome of this analysis was that the rats would have obtained more reinforcers had they responded at the same rate but randomly. Based on the interresponse-time analysis in Experiment 1, it was shown that rats trained on the differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 72-s schedule could increase the number of reinforcers obtained in two ways: first, by a coherent shift of the interresponse-time distribution toward longer durations and, second, by dispersal of the interresponse times toward a random interresponse-time distribution. Experiment 2 applied the analysis described in Experiment 1 to the effects of desipramine and gepirone. Both drugs decreased response rate and increased reinforcement rate, but their effects on the distribution of interresponse times were different. The increase in reinforcement rate observed with desipramine was accompanied by a coherent shift of the reinforcement rate observed with gepirone was accompanied by dispersal of the interresponse-time distribution toward the random negative exponential prediction.

Experiment I investigated the effects of reinforcer magnitude on differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedule performance in three phases. In Phase 1, two groups of rats (n = 6 and 5) responded under a DRI. 72-s schedule with reinforcer magnitudes of either 30 or 300 microl of water. After acquisition, the water amounts were reversed for each rat. In Phase 2, the effects of the same reinforcer magnitudes on DRL 18-s schedule performance were examined across conditions. In Phase 3, each rat responded unider a DR1. 18-s schedule in which the water amotnts alternated between 30 and 300 microl daily. Throughout each phase of Experiment 1, the larger reinforcer magnitude resulted in higher response rates and lower reinforcement rates. The peak of the interresponse-time distributions was at a lower value tinder the larger reinforcer magnitude. In Experiment 2, 3 pigeons responded under a DRL 20-s schedule in which reinforcer magnitude (1-s or 6-s access to grain) varied iron session to session. Higher response rates and lower reinforcement rates occurred tinder the longer hopper duration. These results demonstrate that larger reinforcer magnitudes engender less efficient DRL schedule performance in both rats and pigeons, and when reinforcer magnitude was held constant between sessions or was varied daily. The present results are consistent with previous research demonstrating a decrease in efficiency as a function of increased reinforcer magnituide tinder procedures that require a period of time without a specified response. These findings also support the claim that DRI. schedule performance is not governed solely by a timing process.

An adjusting-amount procedure was used to measure discounting of reinforcer value by delay. Eight rats chose between a varying amount of immediate water and a fixed amount of water given after a delay. The amount of immediate water was systematically adjusted as a function of the rats' previous choices. This procedure was used to determine the indifference point at which each rat chose the immediate amount and the delayed amount with equal frequency. The amount of immediate water at this indifference point was used to estimate the value of the delayed amount of water. In Experiment 1, the effects of daily changes in the delay to the fixed reinforcer (100 microliters of water delivered after 0, 2, 4, 8, or 16 s) were tested. Under these conditions, the rats reached indifference points within the first 30 trials of each 60-trial session. In Experiment 2, the effects of water deprivation level on discounting of value by delay were assessed. Altering water deprivation level affected the speed of responding but did not affect delay discounting. In Experiment 3, the effects of varying the magnitude of the delayed water (100, 150, and 200 microliters) were tested. There was some tendency for the discounting function to be steeper for larger than for smaller reinforcers, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. In all three experiments, the obtained discount functions were well described by a hyperbolic function. These experiments demonstrate that the adjusting-amount procedure provides a useful tool for measuring the discounting of reinforcer value by delay.

Peak deviation analysis is a quantitative technique for characterizing interresponse-time distributions that result from training on differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedules of reinforcement. It compares each rat's obtained interresponse-time distribution to the corresponding negative exponential distribution that would have occurred if the rat had emitted the same number of responses randomly in time, at the same rate. The comparison of the obtained distributions with corresponding negative exponential distributions provides the basis for computing three standardized metrics (burst ratio, peak location, and peak area) that quantitatively characterize the profile of the obtained interresponse-time distributions. In Experiment 1 peak deviation analysis quantitatively described the difference between the interresponse-time distributions of rats trained on variable-interval 300-s and differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 72-s schedules of reinforcement. In Experiment 2 peak deviation analysis differentiated between the effects of the psychomotor stimulant d-amphetamine, the anxiolytic compound chlordiazepoxide, and the antidepressant desipramine. The results suggest that peak deviation analysis of interresponse-time distributions may provide a useful behavioral assay system for characterizing the effects of drugs.