Biomedical subjects

C P Shimp

Publications and source records attributed to C P Shimp.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed1976

Short-term memory in the pigeon: relative recency.

Three pigeons pecked for food in an experiment in which each trial consisted of two phases. The first phase consisted of a pattern of three successively illuminated, randomly selected left or right keys. A subject was required to peck each of the lighted keys as they appeared. Thus, in the first phase, a subject emitted a pattern of three left- or right-key pecks. Over trials, all eight possible patterns appeared. A time interval separated the first phase from the second phase, which began with presentation of a randomly selected one of three cues. A reinforcer was delivered in the second phase if a subject pecked the side key that had appeared in the first phase in an ordinal position corresponding to the cue presented in the second phase. That is, the three cues probed a pigeon's memory for the side key it had pecked first, second, or third, in the first phase of a trial. The results show that a pigeon can remember for more than 4 sec the order in which it has just seen and pecked two lighted keys: a pigeon can remember the temporal organization or pattern of events in its recent environment. Consequently, the functional stimulus present when a reinforcer is delivered may include a subject's short-term memory for the temporal organization of recent events, such as the pattern of its own recent behavior. This possibility is consistent with a molecular analysis of operant behavior focusing on local patterns of behavior.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1976

Organization in memory and behavior.

SOME COMMON REINFORCEMENT CONTINGENCIES MAKE THE DELIVERY OF A REINFORCER DEPEND ON THE OCCURRENCE OF BEHAVIOR LACKING SIGNIFICANT TEMPORAL STRUCTURE: a reinforcer may be contingent on nearly instantaneous responses such as a pigeon's key peck, a rat's lever press, a human's button press or brief verbal utterance, and so on. Such a reinforcement contingency conforms much more closely to the functionalist tradition in experimental psychology than to the structuralist tradition. Until recently, the functionalist tradition, in the form of a kind of associationism, typified most research on human learning and memory. Recently, however, research on human memory has focused more on structural issues: now the basic unit of analysis often involves an organized temporal pattern of behavior. A focus on the interrelations between the function and structure of behavior identifies a set of independent and dependent variables different from those identified by certain common kinds of "molar" behavioral analyses. In so doing, such a focus redefines some of the significant issues in the experimental analysis of behavior.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1976

Short-term memory in the pigeon: the previously reinforced response.

Eighteen pigeons served in a discrete-trials short-term memory experiment in which the reinforcement probability for a peck on one of two keys depended on the response reinforced on the previous trial: either the probability of reinforcement on a trial was 0.8 for the same response reinforced on the previous trial and was 0.2 for the other response (Group A), or, it was 0 or 0.2 for the same response and 1.0 or 0.8 for the other response (Group B). A correction procedure ensured that over all trials reinforcement was distributed equally across the left and right keys. The optimal strategy was either a winstay, lose-shift strategy (Group A) or a win-shift, lose-stay strategy (Group B). The retention interval, that is the intertrial interval, was varied. The average probability of choosing the optimal alternative reinforced 80% of the time was 0.96, 0.84, and 0.74 after delays of 2.5, 4.0, and 6.0 sec, respectively for Group A, and was 0.87, 0.81, and 0.55 after delays of 2.5, 4.0, and 6.0 sec, respectively, for Group B. This outcome is consistent with the view that behavior approximated the optimal response strategy but only to an extent permitted by a subject's short-term memory for the cue correlated with reinforcement, that is, its own most-recently reinforced response. More generally, this result is consistent with "molecular" analyses of operant behavior, but is inconsistent with traditional "molar" analyses holding that fundamental controlling relations may be discovered by routinely averaging over different local reinforcement contingencies. In the present experiment, the molar results were byproducts of local reinforcement contingencies involving an organism's own recent behavior.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1975

Reinforcement of behavioral patterns: shaping a scallop.

Temporal patterns of key pecking by pigeons were shaped by a schedule in which the delivery of food was contingent upon a measure of the overall extent to which the temporal pattern of behavior within a 5-sec trial conformed to a required pattern. This pattern approximated a constant rate of change in the rate of key pecking throughout the 5-sec trial. In comparison with behavior maintained by a classical fixed-interval 5-sec schedule, the new schedule controlled a better approximation to a "scallop" within individual trials and greatly reduced intersubject variability. These results are consistent with the view that the delivery of a reinforcer after a behavioral pattern a few seconds in duration may strengthen the entire pattern as a unit, or operant. The response topography contiguous with reinforcement may be a negligible fraction of the strengthened operant. One implication of this view is that mean response rate for such brief responses as key pecks and lever presses is a byproduct of whatever patterns are strengthened, and generally will not reveal fundamental controlling relationships, whenever a reinforcer is not contiguous with all the behavior on which it is contingent.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1975

Molecular contingencies: reinforcement probability.

Pigeons obtained food by responding in a discrete-trials two-choice probability-learning experiment involving temporal stimuli. A given response alternative, a left- or right-key peck, had 11 associated reinforcement probabilities within each session. Reinforcement probability for a choice was an increasing or a decreasing function of the time interval immediately preceding the choice. The 11 equiprobable temporal stimuli ranged from 1 to 11 sec in 1-sec classes. Preference tended to deviate from probability matching in the direction of maximizing; i.e., the percentage of choices of the preferred response alternative tended to exceed the probability of reinforcement for that alternative. This result was qualitatively consistent with probability-learning experiments using visual stimuli. The result is consistent with a molecular analysis of operant behavior and poses a difficulty for molar theories holding that local variations in reinforcement probability may safely be disregarded in the analysis of behavior maintained by operant paradigms.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1974

Choice between response rates.

Three pigeons were required to peck a single key at a higher and a lower rate, corresponding to two classes of shorter and longer concurrently reinforced interresponse times. Food reinforcers arranged by a single variable-interval schedule were randomly allocated to the two reinforced interresponse times. The absolute durations of reinforced interresponse times were varied while the total reinforcements per hour was held constant and the relative duration, i.e., the relative reciprocal, of the shorter reinforcer class was held constant at 0.70. Preference for the higher rate of responding, as measured by the relative frequency of responses terminating interresponse times in the shorter reinforced class, depended on the absolute reinforced response rates. Preference for the higher reinforced rate increased from a level of near-indifference (0.50) at high reinforced response rates, through the matching level (0.70) at intermediate reinforced response rates, to a virtually exclusive preference (>0.90) at low reinforced response rates. These results resemble corresponding preference functions obtained with two-key concurrent-chains schedules and thereby provide another sense in which it may be said that interresponse-time distributions from interval schedules estimate preference functions for the component response rates corresponding to different classes of reinforced interresponse times.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1974

Time allocation and response rate.

Food reinforcement for key pecking by three pigeons was arranged by a variable-interval schedule and a device that assigned each reinforcement to one of 10 component response rates corresponding to 10 classes of equally reinforced interresponse times ranging from 1.0 to 6.0 sec in 0.5-sec classes. The overall number of reinforcements per hour was varied from one to more than 60. Overall response rate was a monotonically increasing, negatively accelerated function of the overall number of reinforcements per hour. This function was decomposed into two time-allocation functions: (1) the time allocated to all of the reinforced component response rates as a function of the total reinforcement rate, and, (2) the time allocated to a particular reinforced component response rate as a function of the reinforcement rate for that component. Asymptotic response rate was predicted by combining the asymptotes of the two separate time-allocation functions: virtually all of the time was spent responding, and the percentage of the time spent responding that was allocated to a particular reinforced component response rate roughly equalled the relative reinforcements per hour for that component.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1974

Time-allocation, matching, and contrast.

A variable-interval schedule arranged food reinforcement for key pecking by pigeons on a single operandum at two rates, corresponding to two classes of reinforced interresponse times ranging from 1.5 to 2.5 sec and from 3.5 to 4.5 sec. The scheduled reinforcement rate for the higher component response rate was constant and equivalent to that of a variable-interval 4-min schedule. The scheduled reinforcement rate for the lower component response rate varied from zero to over 100 per hour. The number of occurrences of the constant component response rate varied inversely with the reinforcement rate for the variable component. This result, by definition a concurrent reinforcement interaction, or contrast, was the combined effect of two time-allocation functions, which together determine mean response rate: the time allocated to both component rates as a function of the total reinforcement rate, and the time allocated to a particular component rate as a function of the percentage of reinforcements for that component. The present experiment reveals a further parallel between the controlling relations for free responding on a single operandum and those for choice between two operanda; in each case, a concurrent reinforcement interaction can be found that corresponds to matching.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1974

Short-term memory in the pigeon: stimulus-response associations.

THREE PIGEONS PECKED FOR FOOD IN TWO EXPERIMENTS IN WHICH EACH TRIAL CONSISTED OF TWO PHASES: a study and a test phase. The study phase in Experiment I consisted of two stimulus-response pairs presented successively. Each pair consisted of the illumination of a left or right key (the stimulus) and a peck on the lighted side key (the response). The study phase in Experiment II consisted of three such pairs presented successively. A retention interval, varied between 0.1 and 4.0 sec, separated the study phase from the test phase. The test phase of a trial began with the illumination of the center key by one of two (Experiment I) or three (Experiment II) colors. This color was the same as the stimulus element of one of the pairs in the study phase. A reinforcer was presented if a subject then emitted the response element of the indicated stimulus-response pair. The results provide information on the conditions that enable a pigeon to remember the responses most recently emitted in the presence of various stimuli. The results suggest an account of the maintenance of behavior that is temporally noncontiguous with reinforcement.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1973

Synthetic variable-interval schedules of reinforcement.

Three pigeons pecked for food on a synthetic variable-interval schedule of reinforcement that had two independent parts: a variable-interval schedule that arranged a distribution of interreinforcement intervals, and a device that randomly assigned each reinforcement to one of 10 classes of interresponse times. The frequencies of reinforcement for the 10 classes of interresponse times were systematically varied, while the overall frequency of reinforcement was held within a comparatively narrow range. The 10 classes extended either from 0.1 to 0.6 sec in 0.05-sec intervals, or from 1.0 to 6.0 sec in 0.5-sec intervals. In the former case, some control by reinforcement was obtained, but it was weak and no simple relationships were discernible. In the latter case, the relative frequency of an interresponse time was a generally increasing function of its relative frequency of reinforcement, and two simple controlling relationships were found. First, the function relating interresponse times per opportunity to reinforcements per opportunity was, over a restricted range, approximately linear with a slope of unity. Second, when all 10 classes of interresponse times were reinforced equally often, the relative frequency of an interresponse time approximately equalled the relative reciprocal of its length.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1973

Choice between concurrent schedules.

Six pigeons pecked for food in a three-key experiment. A subject at any time could choose the left or right key and receive reinforcement according to one two-key concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedule of reinforcement, or it could peck the center key. A peck on the center key arranged the complementary two-key concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedule on the left and right keys. The two different two-key concurrent schedules arranged reinforcements concurrently and were signalled by two different colors of key lights. Choice behavior in the presence of a given color conformed to the usual relationship in two-key concurrent schedules: the relative frequency of responding on a key approximately equalled the relative frequency of reinforcement on that key. Preference for a two-key concurrent schedule, which was equivalent to preference for a color, was measured by the percentage of all responses on the left and right keys in the presence of that color: this percentage approximately equalled the percentage of all reinforcements that were delivered in the presence of that color. Thus, choice between concurrent schedules conforms approximately to the same relationship as does choice between alternatives in a single concurrent schedule.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1973

Sequential dependencies in free-responding.

Three pigeons pecked for food in an experiment in which reinforcements were arranged for responses terminating sequences of interresponse times. Each reinforced interresponse time belonged to a class extending either from 1.0 to 2.0 sec (class A) or from 3.0 to 4.5 sec (class B). Reinforcements were arranged by a single variable-interval schedule and a random device that assigned each reinforcement to one of four sequences of two successive interresponse times: AA, AB, BA, or BB. Throughout the experiment, half of the reinforcements were delivered for interresponse times in class A and half for those in class B. Over conditions, the interresponse time preceding a reinforced interresponse time always, half of the time, or never, belonged to class A. The duration of the interresponse time preceding a reinforced one had a pronounced effect on response patterning. It also had a pronounced effect on the overall response probability, which was highest, intermediate, and lowest, when the interresponse time preceding a reinforced interresponse time always, half of the time, or never, belonged to class A, respectively. In no case were successive interresponse times independent, so that overall response probability was not representative of momentary response probabilities.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1971

Matching to relative reinforcement frequency in multiple schedules with a short component duration.

Three pigeons performed on two-component multiple variable-interval variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. There were two independent variables: component duration and the relative frequency of reinforcement in a component. The component duration, which was always the same in both components, was varied over experimental conditions from 2 to 180 sec. Over these conditions, the relative frequency of reinforcement in a component was either 0.2 or 0.8 (+/-0.03). As the component duration was shortened, the relative frequency of responding in a component approached a value equal to the relative frequency of reinforcement in that component. When the relative frequency of reinforcement was varied over conditions in which the component duration was fixed at 5 sec, the relative frequency of responding in a component closely approximated the relative frequency of reinforcement in that component. That is, the familiar matching relationship, obtained previously only with concurrent schedules, was obtained in multiple schedules with a short component duration.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1971

The reinforcement of four interresponse times in a two-alternative situation.

Pigeons pecked for food in a two-key procedure. A concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedule of reinforcement for two classes of interresponse times was arranged on each key. A visual stimulus set the occasion for potential reinforcement of the four operant classes: shorter and longer interresponse times on left and right keys. In Exp. I, the relative frequency of respones on a key equalled the relative frequency of reinforcement on that key. In Exp. II, the relative frequency of an interresponse time equalled the relative reciprocal of its length. In Exp. III, the relative frequency of an interresponse time was a monotonically increasing function of its relative frequency of reinforcement. These functions relating the relative frequency of an interresponse time to its relative length and to its relative frequency of reinforcement were the same as if there had been no second key. Also, the distribution of responses between keys was independent of the relative frequency of an interresponse time on either key. Experiment IV replicated Exp. I except that choices between keys were controlled by a stimulus that signalled the availability of reinforcement on the right key. A comparison of Exp. I and IV suggested that the relative frequency of an interresponse time on one key generally was independent of behavior on the other key, but that the number of responses per minute on a key did depend on behavior on the other key.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1971

Two-key concurrent paced variable-interval paced variable-interval schedules of reinforcement.

Nine pigeons were used in two experiments in which a response was reinforced if a variable-interval schedule had assigned a reinforcement and if the response terminated an interresponse time within a certain interval, or class, of interresponse times. One such class was scheduled on one key, and a second class was scheduled on a second key. The procedure was, therefore, a two-key concurrent paced variable-interval paced variable-interval schedule. In Exp. I, the lengths of the two reinforced interresponse times were varied. The relative frequency of responding on a key approximately equalled the relative reciprocal of the length of the interresponse time reinforced on that key. In Exp. II, the relative frequency and relative magnitude of reinforcement were varied. The relative frequency of responding on the key for which the shorter interresponse time was reinforced was a monotonically increasing, negatively accelerated function of the relative frequency of reinforcement on that key. The relative frequency of responding depended on the relative magnitude of reinforcement in approximately the same way as it depended on the relative frequency of reinforcement. The relative frequency of responding on the key for which the shorter interresponse time was reinforced depended on the lengths of the two reinforced interresponse times and on the relative frequency and relative magnitude of reinforcement in the same way as the relative frequency of the shorter interresponse time depended on these variables in previous one-key concurrent schedules of reinforcement for two interresponse times.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1970

The concurrent reinforcement of two interresponse times: absolute rate of reinforcement.

Three pigeons obtained food on a one-key schedule of reinforcement for two concurrent, discriminated interresponse times. The overall rate of reinforcement was determined by a family of variable-interval schedules and by a continuous reinforcement schedule. The average frequency of reinforcement varied from 1.1 to 300 reinforcements per hour; the relative frequency of reinforcement for each of the two interresponse times was 0.5 throughout the experiment. The number of responses per minute increased sharply as the number of reinforcements per hour increased from 1 to 20. Beyond 30 reinforcements per hour, the curve was approximately flat, although it sometimes decreased slightly at the highest reinforcement rates. The relative frequency of the shorter interresponse time also increased sharply as the number of reinforcements per hour increased from 1 to 20. The asymptote of the relative frequency function approximately equalled the relative reciprocal of the length of the shorter interresponse time for reinforcement rates greater than 30 or 40 reinforcements per hour. This approximation was obscured by the response-rate function.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1969

The concurrent reinforcement of two interresponse times: the relative frequency of an interresponse time equals its relative harmonic length.

The relative lengths of two concurrently reinforced interresponse times were varied in an experiment in which three pigeons obtained food by pecking on a single key. Visual discriminative stimuli accompanied the two time intervals in which reinforcements were scheduled according to a one-minute variable-interval. The steady-state relative frequency of an interresponse time approximately equalled the complement of its relative length, that is, its relative harmonic length. Thus, lengths of interresponse times and delays of reinforcement have the same effect on the relative frequencies of interresponse times and choices in one-key and two-key concurrent variable-interval schedules, respectively. A second experiment generalized further the functional equivalence between the effects of these one-key and two-key concurrent schedules by revealing that the usual matching-to-relative-immediacy in two-key concurrent schedules is undisturbed if reinforcement depends upon the occurrence of a response at the end of the delay interval, as it does in the one-key schedules. The results of both experiments are consistent with a quantitative theory of concurrent operant behavior.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1968

Magnitude and frequency of reinforcement and frequencies of interresponse times.

The relative magnitude and relative frequency of reinforcement for two concurrent interresponse times (1.5 to 2.5 sec and 3.5 to 4.5 sec) were simultaneously varied in an experiment in which pigeons obtained grain by pecking on a single key. Visual discriminative stimuli accompanied the two time intervals in which reinforcements were arranged by a one-minute variable-interval schedule. The resulting interresponse times of each of three pigeons fell into two groups; "short" (1.0 to 2.5 sec) and "long" (3.0 to 4.5 sec). Steady-state relative frequencies of these interresponse times were orderly functions of both reinforcement variables. The combined effects of both independent variables were well summarized by a linear function of one variable, relative access to food. Unlike corresponding two-key concurrent variable-interval schedules, the present schedule did not produce an equality between the relative frequency of an operant and either the relative magnitude or the relative frequency of reinforcement of that operant. A tentative account is provided for this difference between one-key and two-key functions.

Animals↗