PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

C F Lowe

Publications and source records attributed to C F Lowe.

30 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Species differences in temporal control of behavior II: human performance.

Human subjects responded on two panels. A differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule with a limited-hold contingency operated on Panel A. In Condition 1, responses on Panel B produced a stimulus on the panel that signalled whether reinforcement was available on Panel A. In Condition 2, responses on Panel B briefly illuminated a digital clock. In both conditions, performance on Panel A was very efficient; with few exceptions, Panel A was pressed only when reinforcement was available. Thus, in effect, a fixed-interval schedule operated on Panel B. In Condition 1, a "break-and-run" response pattern occurred on Panel B; with increasing temporal parameters, the duration of the postreinforcement pause on Panel B increased linearly while overall response rate and running rate (calculated by excluding the postreinforcement pauses) remained approximately constant. In Condition 2, the response pattern on Panel B was scalloped; the postreinforcement pause was a negatively accelerated increasing function of schedule value, while overall response rate and running rate were negatively accelerated decreasing functions of schedule value. The performance of subjects in Condition 2, but not in Condition 1, was highly sensitive to the contingencies in operation, and resembled that of other species on the fixed-interval schedule.

Journal Article↗

Inhibiting function of reinforcement: magnitude effects on variable-interval schedules.

In two experiments, the performance of rats under constant-probability and arithmetic variable-interval schedules respectively was compared when the concentration of a liquid reinforcer was varied within sessions; in other sessions, half of the reinforcers were randomly omitted. When the discriminative function of the reinforcer as a signal for a decrease in the probability of reinforcement was attenuated (the constant-probability schedule) the postreinforcement pause duration was nevertheless an increasing function of reinforcer magnitude. This relationship was also present, but more marked, when the temporal discriminative function of the reinforcer was enhanced (the arithmetic schedule). These results suggested that reinforcement has an unconditioned suppressive effect on the reinforced response distinct from any discriminative function it may acquire. The reinforcement-omission effect, where response rate accelerates following omission, was observed when the reinforcer functioned as an effective temporal discriminative stimulus, but not when such temporal control was absent.

Journal Article↗

Temporal control of behavior: schedule interactions.

In Experiment I the response that terminated the postreinforcement pauses occurring under a fixed-interval 60-second schedule was reinforced, if the pause duration exceeded 30 seconds. The percentage of such pauses, rather than increasing, decreased. There were complex effects on the discriminative control of the pause by the reinforcer terminating the previous fixed interval, depending on whether the fixed interval and the added reinforcer were the same or different. In Experiments II(a) and II(b), each reinforcement initiated an alternative fixed-interval interresponse-time-greater-than-t-sec schedule, the schedule values being systematically varied. When the response following a pause exceeding a given duration was reinforced, fewer such pauses occurred than when they were not reinforced, i.e., on the comparable simple fixed-interval schedule. There was no systematic relationship between mean interrinforcement interval and duration of the postreinforcement pause. The pause duration initiated by reinforcement was directly related to the dependency controlling the shortest pause at that time, regardless of changes in mean interreinforcement interval.

Journal Article↗

Species differences in temporal control of behavior.

Temporal control of rats' and pigeons' responding was analyzed and compared in detail on fixed-interval and fixed-time schedules with parameters of 30, 60, and 120 seconds. On fixed-time schedules, rats' responding decreased greatly or ceased, whereas pigeons continued to respond, especially on low schedule values. The running rate of responses (calculated by excluding the postreinforcement pause) was related to the duration of the preceding postreinforcement pause for rats but not for pigeons. Changes in response rate in successive segments of the interval were best described by normal curves. The relationship between midpoints of the normal curves and schedule value was a power function, with an exponent of less than one for pigeons but greater than one for rats. These differences could be explained in terms of a basic difference between the key-peck and lever-press responses, the two being differently affected by the response-eliciting properties of food.

Journal Article↗

Aftereffects of reinforcement on variable-ratio schedules.

On each of variable-ratio 10, 40, and 80 schedules of reinforcement, when rats' lever-pressing rates were stable, the concentration of a liquid reinforcer was varied within sessions. The duration of the postreinforcement pause was an increasing function of the reinforcer concentration, this effect being more marked the higher the schedule parameter. The running rate, calculated by excluding the postreinforcement pause, was unaffected by concentration. The duration of the postreinforcement pause increased with the schedule parameter, but the proportion of the interreinforcement interval taken up by the pause decreased. Consequently, the overall response rate was an increasing function of the schedule parameter; i.e., it was inversely related to reinforcement frequency, contrary to the law of effect. The running rate, however, decreased with the reinforcement frequency, in accord with the law of effect. When 50% of reinforcements were randomly omitted, the postomission pause was shorter than the postreinforcement pause, but the running rate of responses was not affected.

Journal Article↗

Two-component schedules of differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate.

Two-component schedules of differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate were presented, where the contingencies specified separately two minimum interresponse times, t(1) and t(2), required for reinforcement, depending on whether the interresponse time was initiated by, in one case, a reinforced response (t(1)) or, in the other, a nonreinforced response (t(2)). A distinctive pattern of responding developed on each of the two contingencies. Duration of an interresponse time approximated t(1) when the t(1) contingency was in effect, and t(2) when the t(2) contingency was in effect. This relationship persisted even when t(2) was shorter than t(1), and responding at a higher rate on the t(1) contingency would have greatly increased the rate of reinforcement. Increasing the value of t(2) resulted in both longer interresponse times on the t(1) contingency, and a higher probability of a response-burst on those occasions when the contingency switched from t(1) to t(2). The results indicated that both reinforced and nonreinforced responses functioned as discriminative events in determining the duration of following interresponse times.

Journal Article↗

Effects of reinforcement magnitude on interval and ratio schedules.

Rats' lever pressing was studied on three schedules of reinforcement: fixed interval, response-initiated fixed interval, and fixed ratio. In testing, concentration of the milk reinforcer was varied within each session. On all schedules, duration of the postreinforcement pause was an increasing function of the concentration of the preceding reinforcer. The running rate (response rate calculated by excluding the postreinforcement pauses) increased linearly as a function of the preceding magnitude of reinforcement on fixed interval, showed slight increases for two of the three animals on response-initiated fixed interval, and did not change systematically on fixed ratio. In all cases, the overall response rate either declined or showed no effect of concentration. The major effect of increasing the reinforcement magnitude was in determining the duration of the following postreinforcement pause, and changes in the response rate reflected this main effect.

Journal Article↗