Skip to main content
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 2005 Sep;84(2):185–225. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2005.09-05

Effects Of Adding A Second Reinforcement Alternative: Implications For Herrnstein's Interpretation Of re

Paul L Soto 1,, Jack J McDowell 1, Jesse Dallery 1
PMCID: PMC1243979  PMID: 16262186

Abstract

Herrnstein's hyperbola describes the relation between response rate and reinforcer rate on variable-interval (VI) schedules. According to Herrnstein's (1970) interpretation, the parameter re represents the reinforcer rate extraneous to the alternative to which the equation is fitted (the target alternative). The hyperbola is based on an assumption that extraneous reinforcer rate remains constant with changes in reinforcer rate on the target alternative (the constant-re assumption) and that matching with no bias and perfect sensitivity occurs between response and reinforcer ratios. In the present experiment, 12 rats pressed levers for food on a series of 10 VI schedules arranged on the target alternative. Across conditions, six VI values and extinction were arranged on a second alternative. Reinforcer rate on the second alternative, r2, negatively covaried with reinforcer rate on the target alternative for five of the six VI values on the second alternative, and significant degrees of bias and undermatching occurred in response ratios. Given covariation of reinforcer rate on the second and target alternatives, the constant-re assumption can be maintained only by assuming that reinforcer rate from unmeasured background sources, rb, covaries with reinforcer rate on the second alternative such that their sum, re, remains constant. In a single-schedule arrangement, however, re equals rb and thus rb is assumed to remain constant, forcing a conceptual inconsistency between single- and concurrent-schedule arrangements. Furthermore, although an alternative formulation of the hyperbola can account for variations in bias and sensitivity, the modified equation also is based on the constant-re assumption and therefore suffers from the same logical problem as the hyperbola when reinforcer rate on the second alternative covaries with reinforcer rate on the target alternative.

Keywords: Herrnstein's hyperbola, matching theory, extraneous reinforcer rate, concurrent VI schedules, lever pressing, rats

There is little doubt that Herrnstein's (1970) absolute response rate equation describes the relation between responding and reinforcer rate across a wide variety of contexts, species, responses, and reinforcers (de Villiers & Herrnstein, 1976; Williams, 1988). The equation, known as Herrnstein's hyperbola, can be written as:

graphic file with name jeab-84-02-04-e01.jpg

where RT refers to the rate of responding on the target alternative, rT refers to the reinforcer rate delivered on the target alternative, and k and re are parameters of the equation. The term target alternative is used to distinguish the alternative to which the equation is applied from other, extraneous alternatives. According to Herrnstein, k represents the maximum rate of responding and re represents the aggregate reinforcer rate obtained from extraneous sources. Although the descriptive accuracy of Equation 1 is not in question, the validity of the theoretical assumptions underlying the equation remains unresolved (Dallery, McDowell, & Soto, 2004; Dallery & Soto, 2004; Heyman & Monaghan, 1987; McDowell, 1986; Williams, 1988).

Herrnstein (1970) originally derived Equation 1 from the matching law, which, given two alternatives, 1 and 2, can be stated as:

graphic file with name jeab-84-02-04-e02a.jpg

where R1 and r1 refer to response rate and reinforcer rate, respectively, on Alternative 1 and R2 and r2 refer to response rate and reinforcer rate, respectively, on Alternative 2. Herrnstein reasoned that even in situations in which only a single alternative has been arranged by the experimenter, extraneous alternatives exist (e.g., rearing and scratching for a rat). In such a situation, Equation 2a can be rewritten as:

graphic file with name jeab-84-02-04-e02b.jpg

where Re and re refer to the aggregate amount of responding and aggregate reinforcer rate delivered on extraneous alternatives and R1 and r1 refer to response rate and reinforcer rate on the arranged alternative. Herrnstein produced Equation 1 from Equation 2b by assuming that R1 and Re are exhaustive of the behaviors possible in the given environment and that total amount of behavior (k in Equation 1) is constant. Letting R1 + Re  =  k and solving for R1 produces Equation 1 (substituting the subscript T for the subscript 1).

One assumption of Equation 1 is that, within an experimental situation, extraneous reinforcer rate remains constant across target alternative reinforcer rates. That is, re is assumed to remain constant with respect to the individual rT values to which the equation is fitted. Of course, it can only be so, because a single re is estimated for a range of rT values. Belke and Heyman (1994) acknowledged the constant-re assumption stating, “[re] is assumed to remain constant within a context and across components in the within-session procedure in both the single-operant and choice conditions” (p. 71).

A second important assumption of Equation 1 is that strict matching between relative response and relative reinforcer rate occurs (i.e., that Equation 2b holds). Violations of strict matching known as bias and sensitivity (Baum, 1974, 1979) will affect estimates of k and re obtained from fits of Equation 1 (McDowell, 1986; Wearden, 1981). The generalized matching law (Baum, 1979) for a two-alternative arrangement can be written as

graphic file with name jeab-84-02-04-e03.jpg

where R1, R2, r1, and r2 are as defined previously, b represents bias, and a represents sensitivity. Strict matching holds when both bias and sensitivity are equal to 1.0. Typically, however, sensitivity is less than 1.0 (undermatching) and some bias exists for one or the other alternatives. Occasionally sensitivity is greater than 1.0 (overmatching).

Beginning with Equation 3, McDowell (1986) derived an equation akin to Equation 1 that incorporates parameters for bias and sensitivity. McDowell's modified version of Herrnstein's hyperbola is called the exponentiated version of Herrnstein's hyperbola and can be used when bias and sensitivity are not equal to 1.0. The equation can be written as:

graphic file with name jeab-84-02-04-e04.jpg

where all parameters are as described previously. Equation 4 specifies, like the hyperbola, that response rate is an increasing asymptotic function of reinforcer rate. Equation 4 differs from Equation 1 because it dictates that reinforcer rate must be modified for the effects of bias and sensitivity. Note that when a and b are both equal to 1, Equation 4 reduces to Equation 1.

Although Equation 4 contains four parameters (a, b, k, and re), only three parameters can be obtained through fitting because the parameters rea and b are confounded. For fitting purposes then, the top and bottom of the right side of the equation can be divided by b to produce:

graphic file with name jeab-84-02-04-e05.jpg

where

graphic file with name jeab-84-02-04-e06.jpg

and all other parameters are as defined previously.

Herrnstein (1970) and de Villiers and Herrnstein (1976) have interpreted Equation 1 as a law of response strength in which response strength is proportional to relative reinforcement (the quotient on the right side of Equation 1). According to this interpretation, reinforcement manipulations such as changes in reinforcer magnitude or delay affect responding in the same fashion as do changes in reinforcer rate; namely, by changing relative reinforcement. Thus, just as k must remain constant with respect to reinforcer rate on the arranged alternative, k also must remain constant with changes in other reinforcer properties such as magnitude and delay.

A growing body of evidence indicates that contrary to theoretical requirements, k may vary with changes in reinforcer properties when certain conditions are met (Dallery, McDowell, & Lancaster, 2000; Dallery & Soto, 2004; McDowell & Dallery, 1999; McDowell & Wood, 1984, 1985). Although such evidence might be viewed as falsification of Herrnstein's theory, some researchers have proposed explanations that can account for variation in k (Dallery et al., 2000; Heyman & Monaghan, 1987, 1994) and Equation 1 therefore remains viable. Furthermore, McDowell (1986) has suggested that findings of a variable k may be due to the effects of bias and undermatching and that Equation 4 may reconcile such findings.

Other research has focused on Herrnstein's interpretation of re. Two empirical requirements follow from Herrnstein's interpretation of re. First, manipulations that affect the unit of the target reinforcer, such as changes in reinforcer magnitude, should change re. de Villiers and Herrnstein (1976) stated this requirement as follows: “extraneous reinforcement, [re], is measured in the units of the programmed reinforcement. The smaller these units are, the larger the number of them it takes to measure a given amount of extraneous reinforcement” (p. 1136). To test the requirement that the value of re should vary inversely with the units of the programmed reinforcer, researchers have manipulated either a property of the reinforcer itself (e.g., concentration or volume of a sucrose solution) or deprivation from the reinforcer. In both cases, the rationale was that increases in reinforcer magnitude or deprivation level should increase the unit of the target reinforcer and thereby decrease re (cf. McDowell, 2005).

Reinforcer property manipulations usually have produced results consistent with the prediction that re should decrease as a function of increases in reinforcer magnitude. Several studies found estimates of re to be inversely related to sucrose concentration (Bradshaw, Szabadi, & Bevan, 1978; Heyman & Monaghan, 1994), volume of a sucrose solution (Bradshaw, Ruddle, & Szabadi, 1981; see Williams, 1988 for other examples), and brain stimulation frequency (Hamilton, Stellar, & Hart, 1985), as predicted. Alternatively, one study found an increase in re when intensity of brain stimulation was increased (Keesey, 1964 as reanalyzed by de Villiers & Herrnstein, 1976), which is contrary to predictions.

Changes in deprivation level have produced mixed results in terms of changes in re. Williams (1988) reviewed two studies in which an increase in the number of hours of deprivation produced predicted decreases in re, which parallels the findings of Heyman and Monaghan (1987). Another study, however, did not find consistent decreases in re when number of hours of deprivation was increased (McDowell & Dallery, 1999). Also, decreases in body weight (measured relative to free-feeding body weight) produced appropriate changes in re in one study (Snyderman, 1983), and no change in re in another study (Bradshaw, Szabadi, Ruddle, & Pears, 1983).

One criticism of reinforcer magnitude manipulations is that the relation between the nominal and perceived magnitude of the reinforcer is not known. That is, it is not known if a nominal increase in sucrose concentration, for example, represents an increase in reinforcer magnitude for the organism. Seemingly contradictory findings, such as increases in re as a result of increases in reinforcer magnitude, might be explained by assuming the appropriate relation between nominal and perceived reinforcer values. For example, it is possible that the increase in brain stimulation intensity in Keesey's (1964, as reanalyzed by de Villiers & Herrnstein, 1976) study produced a decrease in the perceived magnitude of the reinforcer, which could account for the obtained increase in re.

The second requirement entailed by Herrnstein's definition of re is that manipulations that affect the amount of extraneous reinforcement should change estimates of re. If a second alternative is arranged,

graphic file with name jeab-84-02-04-e07.jpg

where re represents total extraneous reinforcer rate, r2 represents reinforcer rate on the second alternative, and rb represents reinforcer rate from unmeasured, unarranged background sources. Assuming a constant rb, Equation 7 dictates that estimates of re should be a direct function of r2. If we assume that rb can vary across conditions for which r2 is varied, Equation 7 dictates the minimum value for re: re must equal or exceed r2 under all circumstances because rb cannot be less than zero. Varying r2, therefore, may provide a more stringent test of the interpretation of re than magnitude or deprivation manipulations because, unlike magnitude or deprivation manipulations, there is no question about the unit of measure for r2. That is, the same reinforcer, and therefore the same unit, can be arranged on the target and second alternatives.

Several studies have tested Herrnstein's interpretation of re by manipulating r2 (Belke & Heyman, 1994; Bradshaw, 1977; Bradshaw, Szabadi, & Bevan, 1976). Each study used a similar experimental design. First, subjects were exposed to a series of VI schedules on one alternative, the target alternative (note that in a single-schedule arrangement re  =  rb). Next, subjects were exposed to the same series of VI schedules on the target alternative and a constant VI schedule was arranged on a second alternative (note that in a concurrent-schedule arrangement re  =  r2 + rb). The prediction was that re should increase from the single to the concurrent arrangement by r2. Bradshaw found increases in re greater than the arranged r2 value, whereas Bradshaw et al. and Belke and Heyman reported increases in re that approximated arranged r2 values.

A fourth study (White, McLean, & Aldiss, 1986) used a between-groups design to manipulate r2. Rats were exposed to a series of VI schedules on one alternative and a constant VI on a second alternative. The value of the constant VI varied across three groups of rats (High, Medium, and Low extraneous reinforcer rate). The average re obtained for the Low group was higher than the average res obtained for the High and Medium groups, which is contrary to predictions. Interestingly, White et al. also found that individual subject res were less than obtained r2 values for 15 of 16 rats in the High and Medium groups.

Differences in rb between conditions or groups might account for some of the variability in re across experiments. For example, if rb increased across conditions as r2 increased, then re would increase by more than expected, as found by Bradshaw (1977). In contrast, if rb decreased as r2 increased, re could increase by less than expected or possibly decrease, as found by White et al. (1986). Finally, if rb remained constant across changes in r2, increases in re equivalent to the increases in r2 would have occurred, as found by Bradshaw et al. (1976) and Belke and Heyman (1994). Although variation in rb across conditions or groups might explain some of the findings, the finding that individual res were less than obtained r2 values in White et al. can not be explained by variation in rb. That is because, according to Equation 7, re must equal or exceed r2 under all circumstances.

Alternatively, bias or undermatching or both might account for some of the variability in re across experiments. If strict matching is not assumed, as required by Equation 1, then the exponentiated hyperbola, Equation 4, can be fitted, using Equation 5, and changes in the parameter c can be compared to changes in reinforcer rate on the second alternative. In fact, White et al. (1986) concluded that accounting for bias and undermatching reconciled their data with Herrnstein's interpretation of re. In order to determine whether estimates of c conform to Herrnstein's interpretation of re, Equations 6 and 7 can be combined. Recall that Equation 7 states that re is the sum of r2 and rb. The parameter c must therefore obey the following relation with respect to r2:

graphic file with name jeab-84-02-04-e08.jpg

where all terms are as defined previously. Equation 8 is similar to a power function with a positive intercept. In general, given positive values of a and b, c is an increasing function of r2 with positive intercept. When a is greater than 1.0, the function is positively accelerated. When a is less than 1.0, the function is negatively accelerated, and when a is equal to 1.0, the function is linear.

The first objective of the present study was to investigate the effect of a range of second alternative reinforcer rates on estimates of re in Equation 1 or c in Equation 5. Three of the four studies (Belke & Heyman, 1994; Bradshaw, 1977; Bradshaw et al., 1976) discussed here manipulated reinforcer rate on the second alternative over only two conditions: one in which no reinforcement was available on the second alternative and a second in which some reinforcement was available (amount differed by study). The fourth study (White et al., 1986) varied reinforcer rate on the second alternative over three values; however, that variation occurred between subjects rather than within subjects. Parametric within-subject variation of reinforcer rates on a second alternative is therefore lacking.

The second objective of the present study was to address Belke and Heyman's (1994) finding of within-session covariation of reinforcer rates on the second (r2) and target alternatives (rT). Given covariation of r2 and rT, the constant-re assumption can only be maintained if rb negatively covaries with r2 such that their sum remains constant. Belke and Heyman suggested this to deal with the variation in r2 found across target alternative VI schedules in their study. The suggestion that when r2 varies with respect to rT, re remains constant by virtue of variation in rb is conceptually problematic because it requires a qualitative distinction between single- and concurrent-schedule arrangements. To understand this, consider that when only one alternative is arranged, re equals rb. Thus assuming the constancy of re across target alternative VI schedules is equivalent to assuming the constancy of rb across those schedules. When two alternatives are arranged, however, Belke and Heyman suggested that re remains constant through covariation of r2 and rb. Thus rb is assumed to vary when two alternatives are arranged but to remain constant when a single alternative is arranged. Such a distinction between single and concurrent arrangements is at odds with Herrnstein's (1970) basic premise that the two arrangements are equivalent, in principle.

As discussed above, the assumption that rb covaries with r2 such that their sum, re, remains constant leads to a conceptual distinction between single- and concurrent-schedule arrangements that violates Herrnstein's (1970) assumption of equivalence between the two arrangements. Because the assumption that the two arrangements are equivalent is the foundation of Equations 1 and 4, it is logically inconsistent to conclude otherwise. Thus covariation of r2 and rT should be taken as a violation of the constant-re assumption. Such variation therefore precludes if not confounds the application of Equation 1 or 4. Because of the importance of the constant-re assumption for Equations 1 and 4, the present study sought to determine the extent to which covariation of r2 and rT occurs by arranging a wide range of VI values on both the target and second alternatives.

The present study used a within-subjects design in which each rat was exposed to a series of VI schedules on one alternative, the target alternative. A second alternative also was arranged, and the VI value on the second alternative remained constant within a condition but varied across conditions. This procedure allows assessment of the extent to which r2 and rT covary across a range of VI values on the second and target alternatives and if appropriate, allows comparison of re from Equation 1 and c from Equation 5 (the fitting version of Equation 4) across a range of r2 values.

METHOD

Subjects

Twelve male Long-Evans hooded rats, approximately 70 days old at the start of the experiment, served as subjects. Each rat was housed individually in a colony room under a 12:12 hr light/dark cycle, with the light cycle starting at 7:00 a.m. Rats were maintained at 85% of their free-feeding body weights by postsession feeding of rat chow. Access to water was unrestricted in the home cages.

Apparatus

Experimental sessions were conducted in eight modular operant test chambers (MED Associates, Inc. ENV-007) 24.0 cm wide, 30.5 cm deep, and 29.0 cm high. The front of each chamber was clear Plexiglas, and all other sides were stainless steel. Each chamber was housed in a sound-attenuated cubicle. Two response levers, extending 4.5 cm into the chamber, were located on the front panel 7 cm above the chamber floor, equidistant from the sides of the chamber, and separated by 11.5 cm. A minimum force of approximately 0.20 N was required to register a response. In the middle of the front panel, 2 cm above the floor, was a recessed opening where 45-mg food pellets were delivered into a food cup. Three small stimulus lights were centered 7 cm above each lever. The stimulus lights from left to right were red, yellow, and green. A 28-V white light was centered on the front panel of the chamber 2 cm from the ceiling. Two speakers introduced white noise into the experimental room in order to mask extraneous sounds. A computer operating MED-PC software controlled programming of experimental events and recording of data.

Procedure

During each condition, the rats were exposed to 10 VI schedules (6, 10, 14, 20, 45, 55, 100, 200, 350, and 450 s) presented on the left lever (the target alternative), and a second VI schedule arranged on the right lever (the second alternative). The value of the second alternative VI schedule varied over conditions: Extinction (ALT-EXT), 10 s (ALT-10), 17 s (ALT-17), 50 s (ALT-50), 75 s (ALT-75), 150 s (ALT-150), and 350 s (ALT-350). Three conditions (ALT 17, 50, and 150) were randomly selected for replication. Exposure to 5 of the 10 target alternative VI values occurred in the morning and exposure to the remaining five VI values occurred in the afternoon; a minimum of 5 hr separated each session. One group of schedules was designated as Group A: 6, 14, 55, 100, and 450 s. The other group, Group B, included the 10, 20, 45, 200, and 350 s VI schedules. The order of exposure to Group A and B schedules alternated from day to day.

Each VI value was presented once per session in random order for 8 min. Schedule presentations were separated by 3-min blackouts. During blackouts, the chamber remained darkened, and lever pressing produced no programmed consequences. Most conditions consisted of 40 sessions of exposure (20 sessions of the Group A VI values and 20 sessions of the Group B VI values at each value of the second alternative VI). Two conditions, the ALT-10 condition and the replication of the ALT-17 condition, consisted of 24 sessions (12 sessions of Group A and 12 sessions of Group B). Two other conditions, the ALT-150 Replication and ALT-50 Replication conditions, consisted of 20 sessions (10 of Group A and 10 of Group B). Each VI value was arranged using 20 intervals calculated according to the method of Fleshler and Hoffman (1962). Following reinforcement (one 45-mg Noyes AI rodent pellet), there was a period of 2.5 s reinforcer blackout time for pellet consumption, during which the VI timer stopped, lever pressing produced no programmed consequences, and only the houselight remained illuminated.

During both Group A and B sessions, each target alternative VI value was signaled by a unique combination of stimulus lights and flash frequency. The mean VI value and discriminative stimuli used for each VI are shown in Table 1. During both Group A and B sessions, a switch from target alternative responding to responding on the second alternative turned off whichever of the three left stimulus lights was currently illuminated and initiated flashing of the green light over the second alternative. The light continued to flash on for 0.2 s and off for 0.2 s until a switch back to the target alternative occurred. Thus the different VI values arranged on the second alternative were not signaled separately. A 3-s changeover delay was employed. Rats were fed immediately following the second session of the day.

Table 1. The VI schedules presented on the target alternative and their associated discriminative stimuli.
Presentation group VI (s) Discriminative stimuli
A 6 Red light flashed on for 0.5 s and off for 0.2 s
14 Yellow light flashed on for 1.0 s and off for 0.5 s
55 Green light flashed on for 1.5 s and off for 1.0 s
100 Red and yellow lights flashed on for 2 s and off for 0.5 s
450 Red and green lights flashed on for 2 s and off for 1 s
B 10 All lights flashed on and off at 0.2-s intervals
20 All lights flashed on and off at 0.5-s intervals
45 All lights flashed on and off at 0.75-s intervals
200 All lights flashed on and off at 1.5-s intervals
350 All lights flashed on and off at 2.5-s intervals

RESULTS

Data were averaged over the last six sessions of each condition for each rat. As noted previously, both Equations 1 and 5 (the fitting version of Equation 4) assume that extraneous reinforcer rate remains constant with changes in reinforcer rate on the target alternative within a session. It is therefore important to assess whether extraneous reinforcer rate did, in fact, remain constant where required.

Figure 1 depicts reinforcer rate on the second alternative as a function of reinforcer rate on the target alternative. Each panel represents data from a single condition. Each data point represents the average reinforcer rate on the second alternative versus the average reinforcer rate on the target alternative for an individual target alternative VI schedule. Reinforcer rate on the second alternative negatively covaried with reinforcer rate on the target alternative, replicating the finding of Belke and Heyman (1994). The degree of variation in r2 was directly related to the VI value on the second alternative as illustrated by the slope of the relation becoming more negative as the VI value on the second alternative decreased from 350 s to 10 s. Note the change of scale for each row of Figure 1.

Fig. 1. Reinforcer rate on the second alternative as a function of reinforcer rate on the target alternative.

Fig. 1

Each panel depicts data for all rats for a single condition or for a condition and its replication.

One concern of the present procedure is the use of two daily sessions. It is important to determine that the covariation of r2 and rT depicted in Figure 1 was not an artifact of the current procedure. Figure 2 depicts reinforcer rate on the second alternative as a function of reinforcer rate on the target alternative separately for morning and afternoon sessions. Each panel depicts data from a single condition and each data point represents the average across rats at a given target alternative VI. Note the y-axis differences for each row of panels. There is little difference between the data from morning and afternoon sessions except possibly during the ALT-150 replication condition (open vs. solid triangles) where r2 values from the afternoon sessions appear slightly higher. Thus, although there may be a difference in terms of the absolute r2 values and possibly in the slope of the relation, it is not the case that the obtained correlation is an artifact of the use of two daily sessions.

Fig. 2. Reinforcer rate on the second alternative as a function of reinforcer rate on the target alternative for morning and afternoon sessions.

Fig. 2

Each panel depicts data from a single condition or a condition and its replication. Each data point represents the average reinforcer rate on the second alternative, across rats, versus the average reinforcer rate on the target alternative, across rats, at each target alternative VI value. Filled symbols represent averages from morning sessions and open symbols represent averages from afternoon sessions.

Setting aside for a moment the implications of variation in r2 with rT, the second assumption underlying the application of Equation 1 is that matching occurs between response and reinforcer rate proportions. Although matching between the target alternative and extraneous alternatives cannot be determined, matching between the target and second alternatives can be assessed. The generalized matching equation, Equation 3, was fitted to the response and reinforcer rate ratios from the target and second alternatives. Table 2 presents obtained values of a, b, and the percentage of variance accounted for (VAC) by the best fit of Equation 3. Equation 3 described the variation in response ratios well, accounting for an average of 92.14% of the variance. The average value of a and b across rats and conditions was 0.56 and 2.05, respectively, indicating a significant degree of undermatching in response ratios and a bias for the target alternative. Figure 3 depicts the average value of a and b across rats for each condition. Estimates of a remain relatively constant across conditions whereas estimates of b decrease as the VI value on the second alternative decreases.

Table 2. Estimates of a, b, and obtained percentage of variance accounted for (VAC) from fits of Equation 3.

Rat Condition a b VAC
R25 ALT-350 0.42 2.49 91.34
ALT-150 0.49 1.85 93.71
ALT-75 0.47 1.25 91.51
ALT-50 0.51 2.60 98.10
ALT-17 0.56 0.70 96.41
ALT-10 0.53 1.01 95.06
ALT-150 Rep 0.59 1.63 96.29
ALT-50 Rep 0.53 1.75 95.60
ALT-17 Rep 0.56 1.06 95.19
R26 ALT-350 0.41 4.67 91.93
ALT-150 0.60 2.65 94.53
ALT-75 0.70 2.07 98.24
ALT-50 0.52 2.78 96.14
ALT-17 0.63 1.46 99.27
ALT-10 0.69 1.00 97.32
ALT-150 Rep 0.66 2.17 93.58
ALT-50 Rep 0.70 2.52 95.52
ALT-17 Rep 0.78 0.99 93.08
R27 ALT-350 0.59 1.52 80.38
ALT-150 0.57 1.40 88.79
ALT-75 0.54 0.86 92.88
ALT-50 0.46 1.37 92.41
ALT-17 0.61 0.75 92.98
ALT-10 0.43 0.31 87.28
ALT-150 Rep 0.65 0.99 94.54
ALT-50 Rep 0.69 1.07 94.36
ALT-17 Rep 0.62 0.34 96.29
R28 ALT-350 0.59 4.34 91.00
ALT-150 0.48 3.80 90.14
ALT-75 0.61 3.63 96.15
ALT-50 0.46 3.37 93.22
ALT-17 0.46 2.99 97.95
ALT-10 0.61 2.59 97.70
ALT-150 Rep 0.75 1.97 95.24
ALT-50 Rep 0.65 3.51 96.13
ALT-17 Rep 0.59 2.60 94.15
R29 ALT-350 0.48 3.84 95.46
ALT-150 0.37 4.39 90.25
ALT-75 0.42 2.32 95.24
ALT-50 0.52 2.24 94.41
ALT-17 0.43 0.43 91.29
ALT-10 0.10 0.17 16.96
ALT-150 Rep 0.57 2.12 95.71
ALT-50 Rep 0.49 2.79 95.00
ALT-17 Rep 0.39 0.69 96.16
R30 ALT-350 0.43 5.20 79.46
ALT-150 0.56 4.44 88.88
ALT-75 0.50 3.10 94.68
ALT-50 0.47 4.04 97.52
ALT-17 0.64 3.79 97.21
ALT-10 0.40 1.77 92.37
ALT-150 Rep 0.78 1.82 86.99
ALT-50 Rep 0.45 2.34 86.46
ALT-17 Rep 0.64 2.98 94.17
R31 ALT-350 0.62 2.64 90.81
ALT-150 0.53 1.66 93.31
ALT-75 0.45 1.34 97.94
ALT-50 0.60 2.36 96.20
ALT-17 0.52 0.93 97.01
ALT-10 0.51 0.94 93.31
R31 ALT-150 Rep 0.68 2.11 92.60
ALT-50 Rep 0.64 2.71 98.34
ALT-17 Rep 0.54 1.29 98.58
R32 ALT-350 0.78 1.71 94.86
ALT-150 0.69 1.66 95.80
ALT-75 0.72 1.99 96.69
ALT-50 0.51 1.04 94.89
ALT-17 0.67 0.60 93.86
ALT-10 0.22 0.03 97.07
ALT-150 Rep 0.96 1.51 97.98
ALT-50 Rep 0.72 1.53 92.81
ALT-17 Rep 0.71 0.66 94.40
R33 ALT-350 0.53 2.18 77.48
ALT-150 0.47 1.94 94.96
ALT-75 0.54 1.67 98.51
ALT-50 0.42 1.91 95.43
ALT-17 0.55 1.03 97.70
ALT-10 0.57 1.70 98.17
ALT-150 Rep 0.82 1.47 97.47
ALT-50 Rep 0.81 3.09 96.48
ALT-17 Rep 0.55 1.30 96.12
R34 ALT-350 0.71 2.17 93.96
ALT-150 0.55 3.28 83.99
ALT-75 0.58 2.82 94.99
ALT-50 0.53 3.20 97.34
ALT-17 0.56 1.07 91.91
ALT-10 0.61 1.25 93.28
ALT-150 Rep 0.74 2.05 94.89
ALT-50 Rep 0.75 3.10 98.49
ALT-17 Rep 0.73 1.73 93.68
R35 ALT-350 0.57 1.26 69.93
ALT-150 0.28 1.05 71.44
ALT-75 0.37 0.72 90.08
ALT-50 0.36 1.34 86.73
ALT-17 0.26 0.32 82.19
ALT-10 0.28 0.28 85.77
ALT-150 Rep 0.43 1.65 86.11
ALT-50 Rep 0.51 0.95 96.34
ALT-17 Rep 0.36 0.58 84.38
R36 ALT-350 0.52 5.74 87.39
ALT-150 0.46 7.35 64.60
ALT-75 0.62 4.04 95.91
ALT-50 0.44 2.22 94.85
ALT-17 0.69 2.28 98.77
ALT-10 0.91 1.09 87.97
ALT-150 Rep 0.81 2.80 95.58
ALT-50 Rep 0.85 2.62 94.76
ALT-17 Rep 0.68 1.08 94.00

Fig. 3. Estimates of a and b obtained from fits of Equation 3 to response versus reinforcer ratios.

Fig. 3

The top panel depicts estimates of a from each condition and the bottom panel depicts estimates of b from each condition. Each bar represents the average estimate across rats.

Equations 1 and 5 were fitted to the response rate versus reinforcer rate data to determine if the equations provide accurate descriptions of responding despite violations of their underlying assumptions. Prior to fitting, response rates were corrected for postreinforcement pausing because initial calculations revealed a decrease in responding at the two richest VI values (6 and 10 s), which is inconsistent with both Equations 1 and 5. Previous research has indicated that a downturn in responding at rich VI values may be due to time spent pausing after reinforcement (Baum, 1993). One possible cause of the postreinforcement pause (PRP) is the time required for reinforcer consumption. A constant consumption time will produce larger suppressive effects on response rate during rich VI schedules than during leaner VI schedules.

In order to eliminate the suppressive effects of postreinforcement pausing on response rate, response rates were corrected as follows. First, the average PRP was calculated for each VI schedule for each condition for each rat. The smallest average PRP obtained for each rat was taken as the obligatory time required to consume a single food pellet for that rat. If the obtained minimum average PRP for a given rat was less than or equal to the programmed 2.5-s reinforcer blackout, then only the 2.5-s blackout time was excluded from the time base for each reinforcer delivery. If the obtained minimum average PRP was greater than the programmed 2.5-s blackout, the PRP value was multiplied by the number of reinforcers delivered, and the result was subtracted from the time base.

The obtained minimum PRP values for each rat are listed in Table 3. The average minimum PRP across rats was 3.7 s. Five of the 12 rats produced minimum PRP values less than the postreinforcement blackout of 2.5 s whereas the other 7 produced PRP values greater than 2.5 s.

Table 3. Minimum average postreinforcement pause (PRP) calculated for each rat.

Rat Minimum PRP (s)
R25 4.8
R26 1.7
R27 3.6
R28 4.8
R29 3.8
R30 6.2
R31 2.4
R32 2.2
R33 1.7
R34 2.2
R35 7.5
R36 3.5

The obtained corrected response rates and reinforcer rates are listed in the Appendix. In the majority of cases, correcting response rates for pausing eliminated the downturn in responding for the VI 10-s schedule, but did not do so for the VI 6-s schedule. One possibility for the downturn in responding at the VI 6-s schedule is that at high reinforcer rates, the actual feeding time following reinforcement exceeded the minimum pause calculated for each rat. In fact, the average PRP obtained for each exposure to the VI 6-s schedule for each rat (10 exposures per rat) was greater than the minimum PRP calculated for each rat in every case except one. In that single case, the minimum PRP for the rat and the average PRP on the VI 6-s schedule were equal (i.e., the minimum PRP was the average PRP). Additionally, the modal number of responses per reinforcer on the VI 6 s schedule was one. These data suggest that the VI 6 may have operated more as a ratio than interval schedule. The VI 6-s schedule data, therefore, were not used when fitting Equation 1 or 5.

Equation 1 was fitted, using Microsoft® Excel's Solver routine, to the obtained corrected response and reinforcer rates on the target alternative (excluding the VI 6-s schedule data) for each rat for each condition. This yielded 120 fits of Equation 1 (12 rats by 10 conditions). Table 4 lists the obtained parameter estimates and the resulting VAC. On average, Equation 1 accounted for 83% of the variance, with a minimum VAC of 3% and a maximum of 99%. In 65 of the 120 fits, Equation 1 accounted for 90% or more of the variance in response rates.

Table 4. Estimates of k, re, and percentage of variance accounted for (VAC) obtained from fits of Equation 1.

Rat Condition k re VAC
R25 ALT-EXT 90.24 21.04 98.03
ALT-350 97.15 8.21 76.55
ALT-150 115.43 22.07 84.03
ALT-75 94.72 24.24 85.93
ALT-50 105.69 22.54 85.69
ALT-17 87.26 112.79 87.83
ALT-10 48.45 38.83 78.32
ALT-150 Rep 81.52 19.96 92.58
ALT-50 Rep 71.21 14.12 74.41
ALT-17 Rep 58.79 29.06 72.59
R26 ALT-EXT 165.61 51.74 96.67
ALT-350 131.84 40.16 93.77
ALT-150 128.10 55.70 93.96
ALT-75 122.09 69.73 96.76
ALT-50 114.54 52.89 94.07
ALT-17 84.35 48.80 96.76
ALT-10 95.83 144.80 94.04
ALT-150 Rep 146.46 61.66 94.25
ALT-50 Rep 137.50 53.25 93.80
ALT-17 Rep 170.90 241.77 94.83
R27 ALT-EXT 56.46 45.39 96.45
ALT-350 56.49 27.21 91.08
ALT-150 54.45 33.79 86.10
ALT-75 49.79 16.83 90.50
ALT-50 48.42 11.34 80.34
ALT-17 31.40 27.78 90.87
ALT-10 11.67 12.66 63.01
ALT-150 Rep 49.35 28.21 94.75
ALT-50 Rep 45.93 19.92 89.67
ALT-17 Rep 37.51 78.35 87.59
R28 ALT-EXT 142.32 87.60 97.27
ALT-350 147.18 100.97 95.32
ALT-150 90.72 86.21 94.41
ALT-75 138.31 74.66 93.71
ALT-50 83.73 42.61 81.45
ALT-17 79.41 17.08 83.12
ALT-10 65.35 48.47 92.64
ALT-150 Rep 198.70 329.28 94.57
ALT-50 Rep 122.64 73.09 91.16
ALT-17 Rep 119.15 69.32 82.31
R29 ALT-EXT 103.59 28.94 93.61
ALT-350 97.39 25.11 88.61
ALT-150 95.63 77.55 96.87
ALT-75 63.74 27.68 95.03
ALT-50 54.87 30.22 91.38
ALT-17 39.19 73.21 90.11
ALT-10 4.93 0.11 21.59
ALT-150 Rep 99.75 45.62 82.75
ALT-50 Rep 76.41 25.98 88.79
ALT-17 Rep 27.67 12.30 70.20
R30 ALT-EXT 12.86 0.24 2.60
ALT-350 27.57 0.75 2.99
ALT-150 31.04 6.21 52.71
ALT-75 25.72 5.68 81.20
ALT-50 62.09 31.61 89.72
ALT-17 26.01 17.07 92.07
ALT-10 15.15 25.85 71.29
ALT-150 Rep 20.16 1.94 25.69
ALT-50 Rep 11.96 0.94 23.44
ALT-17 Rep 21.96 11.69 66.76
R31 ALT-EXT 156.50 115.42 96.42
ALT-350 156.49 53.33 92.83
ALT-150 138.69 91.41 93.91
ALT-75 100.78 50.76 96.13
ALT-50 116.85 40.71 91.03
ALT-17 63.68 31.61 88.94
ALT-10 60.76 66.73 72.16
ALT-150 Rep 130.47 63.07 96.25
ALT-50 Rep 124.24 39.76 96.07
ALT-17 Rep 85.79 26.34 87.06
R32 ALT-EXT 97.59 29.43 94.36
ALT-350 111.96 28.49 96.88
ALT-150 107.51 36.85 95.06
ALT-75 118.20 38.49 97.38
ALT-50 89.61 46.17 79.65
ALT-17 92.30 102.53 95.16
ALT-10 1.83 1.10 88.60
ALT-150 Rep 115.07 57.07 97.13
ALT-50 Rep 102.74 50.49 98.36
ALT-17 Rep 132.03 143.28 98.48
R33 ALT-EXT 81.53 9.38 75.63
ALT-350 109.64 10.65 83.13
ALT-150 109.73 15.52 87.48
ALT-75 97.63 15.53 87.39
ALT-50 67.19 12.94 85.52
ALT-17 58.74 26.99 90.79
ALT-10 51.87 41.02 89.81
ALT-150 Rep 82.56 21.25 87.13
ALT-50 Rep 68.92 12.19 82.21
ALT-17 Rep 69.62 58.66 86.20
R34 ALT-EXT 154.31 62.68 97.14
ALT-350 146.96 53.90 95.72
ALT-150 148.90 70.15 97.20
ALT-75 133.69 58.92 97.72
ALT-50 92.97 53.27 92.94
ALT-17 78.00 142.63 84.76
ALT-10 72.05 100.68 96.75
ALT-150 Rep 103.89 48.34 88.18
ALT-50 Rep 120.66 53.54 95.50
ALT-17 Rep 63.30 53.22 92.85
R35 ALT-EXT 31.58 43.20 92.97
ALT-350 38.37 9.84 60.69
ALT-150 19.45 1.06 26.27
ALT-75 14.45 0.78 4.35
ALT-50 21.18 7.04 29.30
ALT-17 5.93 1.43 19.69
ALT-10 13.31 6.22 48.07
ALT-150 Rep 33.56 14.57 60.24
ALT-50 Rep 42.14 20.81 75.91
ALT-17 Rep 21.03 4.57 64.84
R36 ALT-EXT 143.10 103.73 96.46
ALT-350 105.06 49.64 96.42
ALT-150 156.24 133.98 97.50
ALT-75 88.33 80.11 95.73
ALT-50 120.01 157.35 96.03
ALT-17 99.92 106.84 96.49
ALT-10 32.88 75.74 99.06
ALT-150 Rep 125.00 97.61 98.94
ALT-50 Rep 132.57 99.49 95.52
ALT-17 Rep 151.54 220.13 99.17

Fits of Equation 1 were poor in many cases for Rats R30 and R35. If the fits from Rats R30 and R35 are discarded, the average percentage VAC by Equation 1 rises to 90% with 63 of the 100 fits accounting for greater than 90% of the variance. Figure 4 depicts fits of Equation 1 from selected conditions. Each panel depicts data for an individual rat.

Fig. 4. Target alternative response rate as a function of target alternative reinforcer rate.

Fig. 4

Each panel depicts data for an individual rat from the ALT-EXT, ALT-150, ALT-50, and ALT-10 conditions. Error bars represent plus or minus one standard error of the mean. Curved lines in each panel represent fits of Equation 1 to the data from a condition.

According to Equation 7, re should vary as a linear function of the average r2 with slope 1 and positive intercept. Figure 5 depicts estimates of re obtained from each condition plotted as a function of the average r2 obtained during each condition. The solid line in each panel is the best fit of Equation 7. Table 5 lists the intercept of the best fit of Equation 7 for each rat. Equation 7 did a poor job of describing the variance in estimates of re across conditions: For all 12 fits, the mean of the data accounted for more of the variance than did the fitted function.

Fig. 5. Estimates of re from fits of Equation 1 as a function of average reinforcer rate on the second alternative.

Fig. 5

Each panel depicts data for an individual rat. Solid circles represent estimates obtained from original determinations. Open circles represent estimates obtained from replication conditions. The solid line in each panel represents the best fit of Equation 7.

Table 5. Estimates of rb from fits of Equation 7 to re versus r2 data.

Rat All conditions Excluding ALT-10 Excluding ALT-10, 17, 50, 75, 17 Rep, and 50 Rep
R25 0.00 0.00 1.96
R26 14.33 29.58 44.44
R27 0.00 0.00 16.22
R28 40.29 59.58 77.09
R29 0.00 0.00 23.76
R30 0.00 0.00 0.00
R31 0.00 4.82 60.70
R32 0.00 7.38 18.87
R33 0.00 0.00 1.59
R34 0.00 14.06 46.56
R35 0.00 0.00 0.16
R36 48.85 77.17 81.93

In order to determine if the poor fits of Equation 7 were due to estimates of re obtained under relatively rich conditions, Equation 7 was fitted to the re versus r2 data with re from the ALT-10 condition excluded and, alternatively, with re from the ALT-10, 17, 50, 75, 17 Rep, and 50 Rep conditions excluded. Table 5 lists the obtained estimates of rb for those fits. In both cases, Equation 7 poorly described the variance in estimates of re. When estimates of re from the ALT-10 condition were not included in the fits, 9 of 12 fits of Equation 7 produced a negative VAC (indicating that the mean of the data accounted for more of the variance than did the fitted function). When estimates of re from the ALT-10, 17, 50, 75, 17 Rep, and 50 Rep conditions were not included in the fits, 11 of 12 fits of Equation 7 produced a negative VAC.

Equation 1 also was fitted to the group average response and reinforcer rate data (R30 and R35 excluded) for each condition. The left column of Figure 6 depicts estimates of re and k from fits of Equation 1 to group average response versus reinforcer rates plotted against the average r2 obtained for a condition. Estimates of re remain roughly constant and estimates of k decrease with increases in r2.

Fig. 6. Estimates of re and k from fits of Equation 1 (left column) and c and k from fits of Equation 5 (right column) to group average response versus reinforcer rates across all rats.

Fig. 6

Equation 5 also was fitted to the corrected response rate versus reinforcer rate data for each rat; however, in many cases, reliable estimates could not be obtained. Table 6 lists the estimates of k, a, and c and resulting VAC from fits of Equation 5 where reliable fits were obtained. On average, the equation accounted for 88% of the variance in responding with a minimum percentage VAC of 7% and a maximum of 100%. In 62 of the obtained 76 fits, Equation 5 accounted for 90% or more of the variance in responding. If the fits for R30 and R35 are discarded, the average percentage VAC rises to 93% with 59 of 66 fits accounting for 90% or more of the variance in response rates.

Table 6. Estimates of k, a, c, and obtained percentage of variance accounted for (VAC) from fits of Equation 5.

Rat Condition k a c VAC
R25 ALT-EXT 92.84 0.91 17.16 98.10
ALT-350 310.89 0.28 9.43 93.44
ALT-150
ALT-75
ALT-50
ALT-17
ALT-10
ALT-150 Rep 91.15 0.76 12.26 93.43
ALT-50 Rep 96.72 0.51 6.14 79.66
ALT-17 Rep
R26 ALT-EXT 173.89 0.91 41.15 96.77
ALT-350 145.84 0.83 27.40 94.07
ALT-150 187.59 0.65 29.16 95.04
ALT-75 196.91 0.65 39.10 98.05
ALT-50 176.00 0.62 26.07 96.04
ALT-17 113.59 0.71 28.31 97.80
ALT-10
ALT-150 Rep 375.05 0.52 39.11 96.89
ALT-50 Rep 265.02 0.55 27.61 96.83
ALT-17 Rep
R27 ALT-EXT 52.45 1.19 75.81 96.80
ALT-350 151.49 0.39 16.51 97.58
ALT-150
ALT-75 225.79 0.32 20.61 98.41
ALT-50
ALT-17 83.99 0.50 24.93 94.80
ALT-10
ALT-150 Rep 63.16 0.67 15.35 96.27
ALT-50 Rep 98.76 0.40 10.71 96.08
ALT-17 Rep
R28 ALT-EXT 139.09 1.03 95.99 97.27
ALT-350
ALT-150 143.30 0.72 57.51 94.96
ALT-75
ALT-50
ALT-17 121.89 0.49 8.20 88.40
ALT-10 82.00 0.77 31.74 93.08
ALT-150 Rep
ALT-50 Rep 203.23 0.64 39.26 92.86
ALT-17 Rep
R29 ALT-EXT 106.61 0.93 24.66 93.68
ALT-350 223.83 0.41 13.64 95.98
ALT-150 154.07 0.68 46.42 97.52
ALT-75 75.66 0.72 15.85 96.02
ALT-50
ALT-17
ALT-10 4.94 8.98 12.18 27.70
ALT-150 Rep 128.52 0.69 22.61 83.51
ALT-50 Rep 141.97 0.50 14.62 92.31
ALT-17 Rep
R30 ALT-EXT 12.85 4.24 200.07 12.42
ALT-350 27.57 2.87 89.34 6.60
ALT-150
ALT-75 37.21 0.36 2.87 91.98
ALT-50
ALT-17 39.20 0.57 10.72 94.68
ALT-10
ALT-150 Rep 22.60 0.42 0.96 28.18
ALT-50 Rep
ALT-17 Rep
R31 ALT-EXT 207.76 0.80 78.18 96.72
ALT-350 203.16 0.70 27.68 94.05
ALT-150 130.95 1.08 114.58 93.96
ALT-75 135.78 0.70 27.93 97.37
ALT-50 173.62 0.61 19.91 93.68
ALT-17 121.97 0.52 18.47 92.32
ALT-10
ALT-150 Rep 142.29 0.87 44.91 96.37
ALT-50 Rep 125.70 0.97 37.15 96.08
ALT-17 Rep 133.73 0.52 11.68 91.31
R32 ALT-EXT 108.84 0.78 17.79 95.11
ALT-350 127.54 0.77 17.21 97.68
ALT-150 115.58 0.86 25.80 95.22
ALT-75 148.63 0.70 20.96 98.59
ALT-50
ALT-17
ALT-10
ALT-150 Rep 106.59 1.18 95.63 97.31
ALT-50 Rep 111.51 0.87 36.47 98.55
ALT-17 Rep 146.36 0.94 130.11 98.50
R33 ALT-EXT 84.80 0.82 6.50 76.39
ALT-350 151.12 0.46 4.78 91.56
ALT-150 172.55 0.45 7.17 93.25
ALT-75 125.18 0.57 7.50 91.34
ALT-50 99.19 0.48 6.66 91.99
ALT-17 63.71 0.84 19.46 91.09
ALT-10 166.29 0.47 34.39 94.52
ALT-150 Rep 79.29 1.18 34.06 87.48
ALT-50 Rep 71.96 0.84 8.81 82.54
ALT-17 Rep
R34 ALT-EXT 135.01 1.33 162.33 97.96
ALT-350 145.72 1.02 56.31 95.72
ALT-150 177.65 0.82 47.30 97.37
ALT-75 236.67 0.62 34.25 99.79
ALT-50
ALT-17
ALT-10
ALT-150 Rep
ALT-50 Rep 118.78 1.03 58.16 95.51
ALT-17 Rep 78.86 0.80 37.33 93.32
R35 ALT-EXT 38.37 0.77 26.94 93.56
ALT-350
ALT-150 19.22 1.41 1.88 27.40
ALT-75
ALT-50
ALT-17 5.68 3.97 120.83 23.89
ALT-10
ALT-150 Rep 76.72 0.33 7.76 67.47
ALT-50 Rep 44.30 0.87 15.57 76.09
ALT-17 Rep
R36 ALT-EXT 115.64 1.42 379.47 97.49
ALT-350 119.95 0.82 33.86 96.68
ALT-150
ALT-75 173.19 0.64 53.19 97.31
ALT-50
ALT-17
ALT-10
ALT-150 Rep 112.71 1.16 155.31 99.06
ALT-50 Rep 108.45 1.42 383.35 96.23
ALT-17 Rep

Note. Dashes indicate a failure to obtain unique estimates.

Equation 5 also was fitted to the average corrected response rate versus reinforcer rate data for the group (R30 and R35 excluded). The right column of Figure 6 depicts estimates of c and k from fits of Equation 5 for each condition versus the average r2 obtained in each condition. Both c and k decrease with increases in the average r2.

DISCUSSION

The main finding in the present experiment was the negative correlation between reinforcer rate on the second and target alternatives (see Figures 1 and 2). Given covariation of reinforcer rate on the second alternative (r2) and reinforcer rate on the target alternative (rT), extraneous reinforcer rate can remain constant only if the decreases in r2, are accompanied by increases in background reinforcer rate, rb, of equivalent magnitude. However, when the experimenter arranges only one alternative, rb represents all extraneous reinforcement. To assume that extraneous reinforcer rate remains constant in both single- and concurrent-schedule arrangements therefore requires a qualitative distinction between the two arrangements when r2 is known to covary with rT because rb must vary in the concurrent-schedule arrangement but remain constant in the single-schedule arrangement. Such a conclusion is at odds with Herrnstein's (1970) original premise that the two arrangements are equivalent, in principle.

In addition to the conceptual difficulties associated with assuming that rb covaries with r2, there is no empirical or theoretical basis to assume that rb varies in precisely the manner necessary to maintain the assumption that extraneous reinforcer rate remains constant. From an empirical point of view, the variation in rb required to offset the variation in r2 obtained in the present experiment seems unreasonable. Consider that when the VI value on the second alternative was 10 s, reinforcer rate on the second alternative decreased by 137.3 reinforcers per hour, on average, from the leanest to the richest target alternative VI schedule. Background reinforcer rate, rb, would have to increase by an equivalent amount to offset such a decrease in r2. Some specific examples illustrate this point further. Consider that reinforcer rate obtained on the second alternative during the ALT-10 condition for Rats R26, R31, and R33 decreased by 237.1, 236.5, and 276.3 reinforcers per hour, respectively, from the leanest to richest target alternative VI schedule. In order for overall extraneous reinforcer rate to remain constant given such variation in r2, rb would have had to increase by 237.1, 236.5, and 276.3 reinforcers per hour, respectively, to offset the decreases in r2. Such increases in rb seem unreasonable given the relatively impoverished environment of the experimental apparatus. Given that there is no theoretical rationale for assuming that rb covaries with r2 such that their sum remains constant and that the empirical requirements of such an assumption appear unreasonable, variation in r2 with reinforcer rate on the target alternative, rT, likely should be taken as a violation of the constant-re assumption.

One question concerning the covariation of r2 and rT is the extent to which such variation is likely to occur. Belke and Heyman (1994) reported covariation of r2 and rT when the VI value on the second alternative was 27 s. The present study replicates that finding for a range of VI values. Unfortunately, the three remaining studies (Bradshaw, 1977; Bradshaw et al., 1976; White et al., 1986) that varied r2 did not report the obtained rate of reinforcement on the second alternative for each target alternative VI schedule. Still, based on the VI values used in those studies, it appears likely that covariation of r2 and rT occurred in some cases. In the present study, covariation of r2 and rT occurred for all rats when the VI value on the second alternative was between 10 and 50 s, for most rats when the VI value was between 75 and 150 s, and for some rats when the VI value was 350 s. For comparison, the second alternative VI values used in previous studies were 174 s (Bradshaw), 51 s (Bradshaw et al.), and 40, 120, and 300 s (White et al.). Excluding the Bradshaw study and the VI 300-s schedule in the White et al. study, the VI values arranged on the second alternative in previous studies are within the range of those in the present study for which covariation of r2 and rT occurred.

Covariation of r2 and rT has implications for the application of Equations 1 and 4 to single-schedule arrangements. It seems possible, perhaps even likely, that the rate of reinforcement from unmeasured background sources covaries with reinforcer rate from the experimenter-arranged alternative unless the background environment is comprised of very lean VI schedules. Such variation is even more likely if background sources of reinforcement are comprised of ratio schedules rather than interval schedules because changes in response allocations to a background ratio schedule will produce greater changes in obtained reinforcer rate than a background interval schedule. In either case, it seems possible that extraneous reinforcer rate covaries with reinforcer rate on the arranged alternative. That possibility questions the logic of both Equations 1 and 4 in single-schedule arrangements.

It is worthwhile to note that, despite violations of underlying assumptions, Equations 1 and 5 (the fitting version of Equation 4) provide, for the most part, a good description of the relation between responding and reinforcer rate. Despite the fact that the description provided by the equations was very good in many cases, estimates of re from Equation 1 and c from Equation 5 did not increase systematically with increases in r2, as required. Additionally, estimates of k from Equations 1 and 5 decreased with increases in r2, contrary to theoretical requirements. The failure of estimates from Equations 1 and 5 to vary as theoretically required is perhaps not surprising given violations of some of the assumptions of the equations.

Given that Belke and Heyman (1994) also found covariation of r2 and rT, it is interesting that estimates of re increased as predicted from the single-schedule condition (Single condition) to the concurrent-schedule arrangement (Choice condition) in their experiment. However, Belke and Heyman's conclusion that the increase in estimates of re approximated the rate of reinforcement on the added second alternative was based on group averages. A reanalysis in terms of individual rats does not support their conclusion. Table 7 presents estimates of re for each rat obtained from fits of Equation 1 to the data reported in Appendix C of Belke and Heyman's study for the first Single and Choice conditions. Table 7 also includes the difference between re from the Single condition and re from the Choice condition along with the average r2 obtained in the Choice condition. Average r2 varied across rats from 67 reinforcers per hour to about 96 reinforcers per hour. The increase in re from the Single to the Choice condition was more variable. The smallest increase in re was just over 20 reinforcers per hour and the largest increase was nearly 187 reinforcers per hour. The increase in re was not systematically related to the average r2 as required by Herrnstein's interpretation. Thus, viewed in terms of the estimates from individual rats, the data are not in agreement with theoretical predictions.

Table 7. Estimates of re from fits of Equation 1 to the data reported in Appendix C of Belke and Heyman (1994) for the first Single condition and the Choice condition, difference between estimates of re, and average reinforcer rate obtained on the added alternative (Avg r2).

Rat Single re Choice re Change in re Avg r2
991 37.09 148.21 111.12 67.86
992 129.07 149.43 20.36 81.89
994 65.91 116.19 50.28 96.00
995 52.31 137.47 85.16 66.60
996 54.02 240.78 186.76 74.33
997 88.04 224.57 136.54 73.50

One concern in the present experiment is the response rate correction procedure that was used to correct for the downturn in response rate at the VI-6 and 10-s schedules. Another possibility for correcting response rates would have been to subtract all postreinforcement pause time from the time base. Alternatively, one could leave response rates uncorrected and discard both the VI 6- and 10-s schedule data prior to fitting. Both of these procedures were used in the present study. In no case was the pattern of estimates consistent with the prediction that re in Equation 1 or c in Equation 5 should increase systematically with r2 and that k in either equation should remain constant with increases in r2. Although the method of response rate calculation may affect the exact values of the equation parameters, the main finding of covariation of r2 and rT was not affected by how response rates were calculated.

The present results demonstrate that changes in the distribution of responding among alternatives can affect obtained reinforcer rates even on relatively lean VI schedules. Of course, Herrnstein's account predicts covariation of responding between alternatives because an increase in responding on one alternative must be compensated for by a decrease in one or more of the remaining alternatives in order for total behavior, k, to remain constant. Neither Equation 1 nor Equation 4, however, allows for the variation in extraneous reinforcer rate that can occur with changes in response allocations. Perhaps Equations 1 and 4 apply only to environments in which extraneous alternatives are represented by very lean VI schedules where changes in response allocations do not produce significant changes in obtained reinforcer rate. Unfortunately, it is not known what type of schedules comprise the extraneous environment in single- or concurrent-schedule arrangements, nor whether these schedules are lean or rich or even if these schedules are best conceptualized as VI schedules. This lack of knowledge compromises the application of Equations 1 and 4. Perhaps the present data only reveal boundary conditions beyond which the equations may not be legitimately applied. If so, the domain of the equations may be more circumscribed than previously acknowledged.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Jeanne Stahl, Fernando Gonzalez, and Ebony Roebuck for their help in conducting the experiment. Research was supported by National Institute on Drug Abuse Grant 5R24DA07256.

APPENDIX

Average response and reinforcer rates on the target and second alternatives. Response rates were corrected for postreinforcement pausing using the procedure described in the Results section.

Subject Condition VI value (s) Target alternative
Second alternative
Reinforcers per hour Responses per minute Reinforcers per hour Responses per minute
R25 ALT-EXT 6 405.9 47.3 0.0 0.1
10 297.2 80.6 0.0 0.8
14 229.3 87.1 0.0 0.7
20 165.9 80.6 0.0 2.5
45 85.2 72.2 0.0 3.7
55 69.6 68.7 0.0 5.8
100 23.0 44.3 0.0 6.2
200 19.1 43.0 0.0 4.9
350 16.5 38.2 0.0 4.8
450 13.9 40.2 0.0 3.7
ALT-350 6 460.9 76.8 1.6 2.8
10 286.7 97.1 10.5 7.4
14 236.2 103.5 13.3 9.9
20 166.9 108.2 8.4 11.2
45 60.2 72.8 5.3 16.6
55 74.3 83.6 8.0 14.8
100 33.7 67.3 11.7 22.0
200 27.0 60.5 9.0 19.9
350 5.1 45.5 10.2 19.7
450 3.8 43.9 10.1 22.2
ALT-150 6 460.5 83.5 6.6 3.7
10 312.1 127.8 9.2 14.9
14 239.8 102.2 13.2 11.3
20 166.3 101.3 17.0 21.9
45 72.1 84.6 22.7 31.1
55 66.3 69.8 17.1 25.6
100 39.1 60.8 19.5 28.8
200 14.2 53.8 24.5 35.4
350 11.7 49.0 31.0 36.2
450 6.4 36.3 19.2 26.8
ALT-75 6 428.3 74.6 21.4 11.5
10 293.7 87.9 35.5 21.9
14 218.7 93.8 41.5 34.6
20 149.9 84.1 38.2 35.4
45 65.8 62.2 36.2 50.7
55 41.6 51.3 48.1 56.5
100 39.5 48.0 37.0 50.3
200 17.1 40.3 48.7 51.8
350 9.2 38.4 51.1 49.0
450 11.8 40.4 51.1 55.2
ALT-50 6 425.6 78.4 11.5 4.4
10 311.4 110.6 32.6 11.4
14 214.7 97.4 38.2 15.8
20 154.9 93.0 42.7 21.7
45 58.0 66.3 54.0 29.1
55 57.2 60.5 63.9 27.0
100 34.6 58.6 49.2 29.7
200 14.6 45.6 74.5 37.2
350 10.4 42.4 41.6 32.1
450 9.3 42.8 64.9 36.9
ALT-17 6 411.3 64.9 49.4 23.9
10 259.8 67.6 101.7 50.4
14 177.3 47.4 135.7 66.2
20 106.8 40.1 181.5 77.4
45 52.1 22.9 176.9 84.9
55 44.9 19.5 176.6 73.9
100 18.7 16.8 198.6 74.1
200 20.0 20.2 174.7 92.6
350 18.6 16.6 184.2 94.3
450 10.0 16.8 186.3 97.8
ALT-10 6 270.3 31.3 92.3 16.6
10 215.3 42.0 99.0 23.2
14 138.6 45.1 170.8 40.8
20 104.3 30.1 200.5 52.8
45 36.0 17.1 259.9 64.2
55 46.9 21.4 252.4 67.0
100 22.5 18.8 259.0 70.6
200 13.4 13.3 264.3 69.1
350 8.9 16.3 259.8 73.8
450 9.0 15.7 286.4 82.6
ALT-150 Rep 6 401.3 57.7 3.4 2.8
10 291.0 71.4 4.5 3.0
14 220.7 78.7 10.3 6.7
20 157.9 78.8 11.2 7.9
45 72.1 62.3 21.3 19.4
55 59.7 56.8 25.3 23.1
100 24.5 40.0 15.4 24.2
200 12.7 30.1 10.3 21.6
350 10.2 25.6 19.1 19.4
450 10.2 38.6 17.9 26.9
ALT-50 Rep 6 404.6 54.9 4.8 3.3
10 289.9 62.7 18.2 8.7
14 204.2 74.0 23.2 8.0
20 128.4 69.8 56.4 25.0
45 83.9 66.6 57.9 32.4
55 56.6 47.9 39.0 26.4
100 30.6 34.5 57.2 37.1
200 22.4 43.1 50.5 47.4
350 9.2 35.1 73.2 50.5
450 10.6 37.1 74.4 48.7
ALT-17 Rep 6 362.0 41.3 25.9 6.9
10 259.1 60.7 66.1 25.5
14 167.7 53.7 100.9 37.6
20 122.4 43.6 118.8 51.2
45 63.5 32.5 160.8 66.0
55 47.3 26.8 163.6 65.8
100 34.2 29.9 165.4 77.8
200 18.4 24.2 166.6 84.1
350 11.3 27.7 173.6 82.2
450 9.9 21.6 172.0 82.6
R26 ALT-EXT 6 525.9 118.0 0.0 0.0
10 342.0 137.3 0.0 0.0
14 237.6 135.1 0.0 0.2
20 167.5 139.9 0.0 0.1
45 64.3 96.4 0.0 3.1
55 53.6 77.4 0.0 5.6
100 43.9 65.4 0.0 4.5
200 13.9 34.1 0.0 3.9
350 7.6 22.6 0.0 1.9
450 8.9 37.5 0.0 3.7
ALT-350 6 528.5 106.0 0.0 0.2
10 336.3 117.8 0.0 0.1
14 242.8 122.6 0.0 0.9
20 125.9 81.4 0.0 2.2
45 74.6 88.7 1.3 3.2
55 53.8 85.0 3.9 5.4
100 25.6 51.5 2.6 5.6
200 17.9 31.1 6.4 4.5
350 7.6 22.2 2.5 3.4
450 5.1 25.6 6.3 5.0
ALT-150 6 514.3 89.1 0.0 1.1
10 325.6 111.7 3.1 2.0
14 232.3 95.9 7.3 3.9
20 157.9 103.4 9.8 8.3
45 41.9 60.1 15.5 16.0
55 43.2 42.1 22.2 15.4
100 24.6 36.1 18.2 15.0
200 20.7 38.8 19.4 13.8
350 3.8 23.2 23.0 14.3
450 7.7 18.7 19.1 13.3
ALT-75 6 469.8 72.6 1.7 0.5
10 303.2 97.2 10.6 4.1
14 234.5 97.2 11.8 6.7
20 132.5 83.5 30.7 13.9
45 57.6 45.6 33.5 20.0
55 41.3 43.4 27.8 23.7
100 17.0 24.8 38.0 22.1
200 14.2 26.1 28.3 20.3
350 3.8 16.5 20.4 20.8
450 5.1 14.8 32.1 19.5
ALT-50 6 464.8 76.4 13.3 3.6
10 328.1 99.7 31.2 8.6
14 208.9 85.0 32.1 13.6
20 152.2 95.5 45.5 16.7
45 54.9 54.8 44.3 24.0
55 40.2 41.5 50.6 19.7
100 34.7 42.4 49.1 24.9
200 9.2 20.8 57.7 15.2
350 3.9 18.5 57.6 23.5
450 7.9 26.0 61.6 25.3
ALT-17 6 415.9 54.8 35.9 7.2
10 266.3 70.0 63.4 20.0
14 206.9 70.1 64.0 23.4
20 125.0 62.7 126.4 40.7
45 41.4 38.2 159.7 69.4
55 52.7 39.3 151.6 53.4
100 14.1 14.1 150.8 54.2
200 8.4 17.5 171.9 78.6
350 4.2 12.3 180.6 77.2
450 4.2 13.6 169.7 83.8
ALT-10 6 369.7 70.4 102.3 26.7
10 147.0 49.3 208.5 52.1
14 63.0 27.5 275.5 71.2
20 33.0 14.4 307.8 85.4
45 29.1 15.7 274.6 92.1
55 28.8 15.3 268.8 87.6
100 10.4 12.1 279.6 104.1
200 6.1 7.9 313.4 94.2
350 10.6 8.1 307.3 95.5
450 4.6 7.4 339.3 114.9
ALT-150 Rep 6 487.1 93.6 0.0 0.1
10 315.4 124.0 7.7 6.1
14 224.8 114.9 8.7 3.6
20 153.1 107.3 23.9 12.4
45 53.1 52.0 14.6 14.4
55 54.3 70.4 19.7 20.8
100 23.4 43.4 24.8 19.9
200 19.3 35.4 11.5 15.8
350 8.9 27.0 23.1 18.9
450 3.8 27.3 16.5 27.9
ALT-50 Rep 6 487.6 87.0 0.0 0.1
10 312.7 114.5 10.7 3.7
14 233.7 117.7 17.6 4.9
20 154.9 107.2 41.4 18.0
45 70.1 75.5 34.9 28.3
55 51.1 50.8 50.9 33.2
100 23.9 43.4 48.8 30.2
200 10.4 32.5 48.4 37.9
350 5.2 24.9 57.6 44.3
450 3.9 21.8 41.5 33.4
ALT-17 Rep 6 443.5 83.4 42.9 17.6
10 291.1 97.1 53.0 11.1
14 150.3 55.6 129.3 69.5
20 112.6 58.2 151.1 70.6
45 53.5 28.9 169.1 113.1
55 30.5 17.8 195.6 113.9
100 15.5 13.7 174.1 121.5
200 8.5 14.2 189.5 119.4
350 7.2 14.2 185.8 124.9
450 9.9 14.2 189.3 118.0
R27 ALT-EXT 6 405.5 32.3 0.0 0.9
10 299.0 46.2 0.0 0.1
14 229.0 47.2 0.0 0.4
20 162.8 45.9 0.0 0.9
45 62.7 33.8 0.0 2.3
55 62.9 37.2 0.0 1.1
100 26.7 15.1 0.0 1.0
200 16.5 13.5 0.0 4.0
350 8.8 9.1 0.0 0.7
450 10.1 12.8 0.0 2.6
ALT-350 6 452.8 48.2 1.7 0.9
10 312.7 54.3 3.1 1.1
14 212.1 52.6 5.8 3.6
20 153.0 45.9 8.4 5.2
45 76.8 41.2 2.6 7.8
55 49.4 31.9 2.6 8.0
100 29.5 25.6 5.1 6.8
200 19.1 22.7 5.1 8.3
350 16.6 25.0 5.1 8.6
450 6.3 18.7 8.9 7.4
ALT-150 6 437.5 45.2 1.6 0.6
10 291.8 53.8 7.6 6.4
14 216.6 45.0 17.4 8.3
20 147.4 44.6 12.6 12.2
45 59.3 32.0 17.1 15.4
55 46.0 27.9 23.7 18.0
100 31.1 21.5 15.6 14.5
200 15.5 19.5 23.2 18.6
350 11.7 20.3 24.7 17.7
450 2.6 13.7 12.7 11.7
ALT-75 6 379.3 44.3 28.8 13.4
10 240.3 47.9 37.3 15.8
14 204.9 50.3 50.3 22.5
20 135.2 44.7 46.5 24.4
45 66.9 36.1 30.8 42.1
55 56.1 34.2 30.7 39.3
100 22.2 24.5 37.9 40.2
200 13.1 22.0 44.3 46.0
350 10.4 21.3 40.2 48.7
450 6.4 20.1 32.2 51.1
ALT-50 6 422.2 47.3 34.7 9.7
10 275.2 51.4 46.0 14.5
14 190.2 46.9 54.4 15.9
20 145.7 47.4 58.8 21.7
45 64.5 38.4 63.3 34.1
55 51.1 36.7 55.3 35.6
100 36.1 29.1 63.0 36.7
200 11.8 26.3 58.0 41.8
350 11.9 23.1 56.3 37.8
450 4.0 21.8 71.3 39.8
ALT-17 6 341.3 38.4 87.7 15.8
10 184.2 26.8 134.3 32.2
14 142.7 30.3 144.6 34.3
20 84.3 22.1 160.7 50.5
45 48.9 17.9 154.2 60.1
55 50.5 18.1 157.4 62.5
100 11.3 9.6 172.3 68.4
200 8.5 7.8 171.9 72.7
350 9.8 7.6 167.1 65.9
450 5.7 10.2 192.1 65.8
ALT-10 6 137.6 14.9 199.2 47.2
10 82.5 12.7 233.4 55.3
14 41.1 8.2 270.8 64.7
20 39.6 7.0 270.5 67.3
45 24.3 6.2 284.4 63.6
55 7.5 4.3 289.6 70.5
100 4.5 6.4 280.1 78.1
200 10.4 5.8 267.0 71.2
350 7.5 3.1 291.7 65.2
450 4.6 3.1 298.3 65.8
ALT-150 Rep 6 412.3 33.7 0.0 0.0
10 274.8 44.0 3.0 1.6
14 227.0 47.8 7.2 5.0
20 126.8 37.6 9.8 9.4
45 74.6 36.5 17.3 14.8
55 47.1 28.6 9.6 23.6
100 24.7 21.1 23.4 22.2
200 12.8 15.4 19.3 22.1
350 11.5 13.6 17.9 19.9
450 9.0 18.0 25.8 19.9
ALT-50 Rep 6 416.0 34.6 4.8 0.9
10 270.5 45.0 18.0 7.2
14 208.9 43.3 21.8 10.6
20 149.6 40.4 35.4 15.1
45 70.5 33.5 48.8 34.9
55 55.1 32.7 47.0 33.7
100 37.0 27.1 49.3 42.8
200 13.1 16.5 55.1 37.3
350 19.8 22.1 52.6 39.3
450 7.9 21.0 69.0 45.9
ALT-17 Rep 6 324.3 25.4 47.6 24.9
10 216.7 29.5 100.9 45.4
14 135.9 23.9 123.5 55.9
20 74.0 13.3 158.4 80.7
45 37.4 9.4 170.2 102.1
55 36.8 12.3 154.5 86.3
100 26.6 12.4 150.6 100.5
200 9.9 6.7 167.3 117.2
350 12.6 7.4 160.4 110.7
450 9.8 7.1 172.0 97.4
R28 ALT-EXT 6 422.8 75.4 0.0 0.0
10 319.5 103.3 0.0 0.0
14 232.4 114.3 0.0 0.4
20 169.0 92.8 0.0 0.3
45 67.0 61.9 0.0 0.7
55 65.7 61.0 0.0 0.3
100 24.2 27.9 0.0 0.9
200 15.2 14.8 0.0 0.1
350 6.3 17.0 0.0 0.9
450 2.5 11.7 0.0 0.3
ALT-350 6 452.0 96.3 0.0 0.0
10 318.6 113.3 4.6 1.3
14 226.3 104.9 2.9 1.4
20 160.3 87.1 5.6 3.0
45 66.0 48.5 5.3 3.9
55 54.8 53.1 5.2 4.9
100 36.2 39.5 5.2 4.3
200 2.5 16.9 6.3 5.1
350 8.9 22.8 11.4 5.1
450 6.3 18.8 5.1 3.5
ALT-150 6 361.9 43.9 0.0 0.1
10 224.8 61.1 3.0 1.2
14 159.3 62.9 1.4 2.2
20 130.9 59.8 5.6 2.4
45 38.0 24.3 4.0 3.1
55 52.9 26.2 15.9 4.4
100 24.6 24.8 7.8 4.8
200 7.6 7.5 3.8 1.9
350 1.3 6.3 8.9 2.7
450 7.7 14.5 12.8 5.2
ALT-75 6 464.8 94.3 5.0 1.6
10 311.0 118.8 12.2 3.6
14 226.7 106.7 17.6 5.0
20 158.0 84.8 26.9 9.1
45 79.6 69.7 50.6 13.1
55 67.0 55.7 36.2 12.5
100 26.1 36.3 36.7 16.2
200 19.6 34.5 41.9 18.9
350 12.9 32.3 29.8 18.1
450 3.9 21.1 39.0 14.3
ALT-50 6 416.1 63.0 9.6 2.1
10 274.1 70.2 28.7 8.9
14 222.5 80.2 41.7 11.5
20 128.6 60.7 37.7 13.2
45 46.1 32.0 46.0 8.7
55 49.6 41.4 36.3 13.2
100 36.9 33.7 39.5 13.0
200 19.9 34.4 54.3 15.5
350 6.6 25.6 53.6 17.5
450 5.2 19.6 44.3 12.3
ALT-17 6 430.2 70.8 18.3 5.7
10 279.5 80.0 38.3 8.9
14 185.3 62.9 79.3 13.3
20 137.1 80.9 104.0 25.7
45 84.5 67.6 124.8 28.9
55 58.2 59.0 133.5 29.9
100 27.9 37.0 132.2 31.9
200 18.2 39.0 145.1 35.9
350 9.8 34.0 165.9 43.0
450 4.2 27.6 160.2 37.9
ALT-10 6 392.7 83.5 34.0 6.4
10 201.7 51.4 99.4 11.3
14 171.4 49.7 120.8 18.0
20 109.3 50.6 154.3 27.4
45 31.3 20.1 239.2 34.5
55 35.7 29.1 233.1 28.9
100 30.7 19.9 212.0 27.0
200 19.2 22.1 260.5 34.2
350 13.3 13.8 233.0 35.4
450 10.1 17.4 231.2 38.0
ALT-150 Rep 6 411.6 65.9 1.7 0.3
10 270.8 91.0 6.2 2.6
14 184.7 64.2 18.7 5.2
20 132.8 67.1 8.4 6.1
45 58.0 23.9 10.5 4.2
55 41.7 19.1 17.0 7.1
100 40.5 21.1 15.8 7.3
200 12.8 8.7 12.7 5.0
350 7.6 14.3 11.4 6.0
450 5.1 12.7 14.0 9.5
ALT-50 Rep 6 403.7 54.7 4.8 0.8
10 307.5 95.2 12.3 2.5
14 221.0 96.1 13.1 5.2
20 146.7 89.7 38.1 9.2
45 69.9 50.1 52.0 12.4
55 56.8 53.7 54.0 13.1
100 35.4 26.1 28.9 12.6
200 10.3 26.3 41.8 15.6
350 15.7 34.1 55.5 17.4
450 10.5 20.9 54.9 18.1
ALT-17 Rep 6 333.1 43.5 34.9 7.1
10 309.8 107.5 34.2 7.4
14 190.3 63.8 51.9 9.8
20 153.2 97.9 71.0 17.5
45 52.0 53.3 129.6 35.4
55 47.4 31.6 114.1 30.0
100 35.3 41.9 149.6 42.8
200 19.7 32.4 152.9 44.9
350 8.5 21.2 169.2 49.3
450 7.0 22.2 162.7 42.1
R29 ALT-EXT 6 467.3 74.1 0.0 0.0
10 319.3 94.6 0.0 0.3
14 205.9 87.6 0.0 0.9
20 162.9 93.2 0.0 0.4
45 66.9 79.7 0.0 1.0
55 44.0 46.0 0.0 1.1
100 38.7 58.7 0.0 1.4
200 19.1 51.3 0.0 1.6
350 6.3 18.4 0.0 0.4
450 6.3 17.3 0.0 0.8
ALT-350 6 463.3 71.2 1.7 1.2
10 311.0 94.7 4.6 2.6
14 235.3 88.2 7.4 4.3
20 153.6 87.5 14.0 6.9
45 61.1 59.7 10.6 7.0
55 62.9 71.0 5.2 7.4
100 37.3 46.4 0.0 6.9
200 14.1 36.8 9.0 10.4
350 12.7 39.1 11.4 9.3
450 3.8 29.0 5.1 6.2
ALT-150 6 429.6 64.6 18.0 3.4
10 278.7 78.2 24.3 6.1
14 206.6 63.8 15.9 6.0
20 127.7 63.2 25.0 7.6
45 55.6 39.4 13.2 7.1
55 39.9 27.8 25.1 5.8
100 33.8 29.9 15.5 5.0
200 10.3 15.1 16.8 4.1
350 10.2 12.5 11.4 4.0
450 1.3 9.4 14.0 3.9
ALT-75 6 410.9 48.5 26.1 8.6
10 265.8 57.2 42.6 10.1
14 207.0 53.9 42.5 9.9
20 141.3 59.6 42.6 14.0
45 62.3 41.1 48.8 14.8
55 52.5 40.6 47.0 15.1
100 15.6 20.7 33.8 13.5
200 16.9 23.4 31.1 15.4
350 13.3 21.7 40.8 16.1
450 3.9 15.3 38.7 16.5
ALT-50 6 402.5 46.4 30.9 5.4
10 271.6 54.7 31.6 6.4
14 211.9 47.6 41.2 8.8
20 128.8 41.3 68.6 12.8
45 78.0 37.8 50.7 14.9
55 37.1 27.2 40.9 18.4
100 29.4 23.3 60.0 15.7
200 17.3 22.9 66.4 19.2
350 13.0 18.2 44.3 18.9
450 6.5 16.9 54.9 16.2
ALT-17 6 233.9 24.7 119.8 47.9
10 131.3 23.5 184.8 59.6
14 140.8 28.8 156.9 56.1
20 72.2 17.8 140.8 50.2
45 37.5 12.3 164.1 58.1
55 44.4 14.0 160.4 54.3
100 19.8 7.0 148.8 47.4
200 19.5 8.1 141.8 53.6
350 8.4 7.8 164.4 55.4
450 11.3 9.1 157.9 55.7
ALT-10 6 36.9 7.8 264.4 43.7
10 18.1 5.5 277.4 37.1
14 15.3 3.7 284.1 45.7
20 12.2 4.2 288.8 37.7
45 8.9 4.3 259.9 31.1
55 3.0 5.4 294.4 51.5
100 0.0 2.0 287.2 35.5
200 1.5 3.9 297.9 37.7
350 3.0 4.5 272.9 41.0
450 4.5 7.0 267.8 44.0
ALT-150 Rep 6 372.8 54.7 4.8 2.1
10 278.8 90.7 5.9 3.4
14 210.0 69.2 5.7 4.0
20 130.4 85.7 9.6 12.7
45 42.3 35.6 15.7 13.2
55 59.7 61.6 26.6 17.5
100 33.9 36.9 18.2 12.9
200 20.6 37.8 19.3 17.2
350 0.0 18.9 23.0 17.6
450 5.1 18.7 15.3 12.4
ALT-50 Rep 6 386.7 58.2 4.8 3.1
10 276.8 77.6 24.3 5.6
14 149.1 56.5 41.2 12.0
20 107.9 62.8 43.0 12.0
45 61.4 57.1 56.4 19.4
55 48.5 44.0 57.8 22.9
100 19.9 25.0 56.8 13.9
200 17.0 32.5 46.0 22.9
350 10.5 27.4 40.3 16.1
450 9.3 26.4 52.5 23.2
ALT-17 Rep 6 264.5 32.1 73.1 25.7
10 107.5 32.7 159.6 47.5
14 67.4 17.4 149.2 39.1
20 47.2 21.9 168.5 48.2
45 31.4 18.6 160.3 55.5
55 27.1 15.5 169.1 49.8
100 5.5 10.4 175.0 53.5
200 5.7 12.3 174.6 59.7
350 8.5 9.3 178.6 55.2
450 4.3 9.3 188.8 54.5
R30 ALT-EXT 6 338.1 15.6 0.0 0.0
10 239.2 12.2 0.0 0.0
14 186.5 12.5 0.0 0.0
20 123.6 12.2 0.0 0.0
45 54.6 12.9 0.0 0.6
55 58.7 12.4 0.0 0.5
100 30.7 15.0 0.0 1.1
200 16.5 12.2 0.0 1.7
350 6.3 11.8 0.0 1.1
450 12.7 13.4 0.0 1.3
ALT-350 6 307.1 14.8 0.0 0.0
10 244.8 18.1 0.0 0.0
14 182.0 25.5 2.8 0.7
20 142.1 28.6 6.9 1.0
45 76.9 32.4 4.0 2.3
55 68.8 32.0 9.3 2.3
100 46.8 29.3 3.9 3.1
200 14.2 25.2 10.4 3.9
350 11.5 26.5 10.2 3.6
450 10.1 24.3 5.1 4.6
ALT-150 6 323.1 19.6 0.0 0.0
10 266.1 37.0 4.5 0.5
14 199.7 28.7 2.9 0.9
20 148.5 33.7 9.7 1.1
45 67.7 27.5 17.2 3.4
55 52.9 21.1 18.4 3.9
100 35.1 22.8 16.9 4.8
200 21.9 23.2 18.0 5.6
350 12.8 20.0 17.9 5.5
450 5.1 19.2 20.5 5.6
ALT-75 6 344.3 21.9 0.0 0.0
10 239.9 25.8 10.5 1.3
14 194.2 25.0 10.1 1.5
20 139.5 27.4 11.1 3.1
45 58.7 23.2 31.9 6.0
55 51.6 22.0 27.8 7.2
100 39.8 20.9 42.5 7.8
200 14.3 17.6 38.9 10.1
350 13.0 15.7 41.7 8.5
450 5.2 15.6 42.7 10.7
ALT-50 6 462.3 67.7 11.9 2.6
10 279.9 60.4 30.4 5.8
14 211.9 54.4 38.3 5.1
20 135.9 51.0 32.1 7.7
45 63.7 36.5 48.7 8.7
55 53.7 32.4 54.0 8.7
100 33.2 28.8 46.3 8.9
200 14.4 23.5 51.1 10.1
350 11.8 23.8 56.6 10.2
450 15.9 23.6 62.1 11.1
ALT-17 6 356.7 29.5 4.7 0.3
10 157.7 23.4 79.1 5.2
14 129.1 23.4 62.3 4.7
20 72.9 21.6 93.4 8.1
45 53.4 20.1 85.2 8.0
55 17.9 9.8 131.2 10.4
100 17.9 11.6 120.9 10.8
200 6.8 9.4 137.8 12.5
350 8.2 9.5 130.8 13.7
450 6.9 9.9 142.4 13.6
ALT-10 6 256.2 18.1 65.2 4.4
10 154.3 15.1 70.4 4.8
14 81.6 10.9 131.6 8.8
20 50.4 7.7 165.4 8.3
45 19.9 4.7 181.1 10.6
55 21.2 6.7 180.1 9.3
100 4.3 4.0 203.1 11.3
200 9.9 5.5 175.0 10.1
350 2.8 3.7 195.0 11.1
450 1.4 3.9 191.6 10.9
ALT-150 Rep 6 310.8 17.8 0.0 0.0
10 232.8 22.8 1.4 0.1
14 185.3 14.5 0.0 0.2
20 142.0 23.3 5.5 0.8
45 70.1 22.9 12.0 5.4
55 45.8 16.7 10.4 8.9
100 28.6 17.2 29.9 10.4
200 20.5 18.0 15.4 10.4
350 10.2 17.2 17.9 8.9
450 5.1 15.2 17.9 11.0
ALT-50 Rep 6 301.2 12.3 0.0 0.8
10 216.0 13.3 1.4 1.1
14 169.4 12.5 2.8 0.3
20 122.4 15.0 16.5 2.0
45 39.7 9.0 45.2 4.6
55 35.6 10.7 36.8 6.7
100 39.6 10.2 39.7 5.1
200 15.7 10.2 48.3 8.1
350 7.8 11.6 39.0 14.0
450 2.6 9.1 59.1 9.2
ALT-17 Rep 6 321.9 24.4 1.6 0.2
10 200.9 21.3 46.9 5.0
14 156.3 23.5 39.7 3.3
20 92.3 20.5 76.8 8.4
45 40.5 11.0 127.2 12.7
55 27.9 12.5 138.1 15.7
100 17.9 13.7 131.2 15.3
200 11.0 13.4 136.5 15.5
350 12.6 11.9 155.1 15.5
450 7.0 10.0 142.2 14.4
R31 ALT-EXT 6 509.5 100.8 0.0 0.0
10 330.5 112.6 0.0 0.1
14 241.0 115.6 0.0 0.0
20 178.5 88.7 0.0 0.2
45 62.9 49.3 0.0 0.2
55 54.8 55.1 0.0 0.5
100 38.8 40.7 0.0 0.2
200 24.3 18.2 0.0 0.1
350 10.1 18.8 0.0 0.4
450 12.7 25.5 0.0 0.3
ALT-350 6 527.1 97.9 3.4 1.2
10 321.1 128.4 7.7 4.5
14 240.9 127.7 10.3 5.0
20 178.0 132.7 8.5 6.7
45 85.1 102.1 2.7 9.1
55 52.5 67.6 9.2 8.0
100 38.9 47.4 9.0 9.0
200 14.0 38.8 6.4 8.3
350 10.2 41.8 7.6 10.3
450 6.3 26.5 2.5 6.7
ALT-150 6 472.5 80.4 21.8 10.0
10 321.8 109.6 28.3 15.1
14 224.9 88.8 14.7 13.6
20 153.5 95.5 28.2 19.6
45 71.0 73.7 22.6 23.6
55 51.2 43.1 18.4 15.7
100 34.2 22.3 18.4 14.1
200 19.3 27.3 12.9 15.0
350 11.5 19.8 15.3 14.2
450 7.7 14.4 16.6 10.2
ALT-75 6 433.4 55.1 31.5 14.0
10 297.3 83.0 46.5 23.9
14 230.6 86.6 43.3 28.2
20 160.8 81.7 38.5 31.4
45 74.8 55.4 37.0 34.3
55 59.5 47.5 45.8 29.9
100 31.6 35.7 39.4 32.0
200 15.8 30.5 50.1 35.2
350 14.2 24.1 37.7 26.5
450 13.1 25.8 47.0 36.5
ALT-50 6 503.1 99.3 32.8 8.8
10 310.2 99.7 45.2 14.2
14 232.0 108.5 50.9 14.2
20 154.1 94.3 48.5 21.9
45 68.2 69.5 60.2 27.6
55 74.1 73.7 61.8 23.5
100 40.3 41.6 59.2 30.1
200 9.2 32.0 59.1 34.0
350 12.2 27.7 69.3 41.7
450 14.4 43.9 52.4 35.0
ALT-17 6 409.9 53.3 99.9 26.3
10 245.4 55.0 146.6 47.2
14 183.2 62.6 144.2 49.4
20 121.7 46.6 183.4 69.8
45 67.4 42.1 172.0 80.5
55 48.9 34.2 157.0 73.9
100 26.1 23.3 198.3 84.4
200 12.8 26.3 177.0 91.0
350 9.9 20.8 181.5 88.9
450 11.2 15.7 175.6 81.8
ALT-10 6 385.2 53.7 65.9 17.7
10 117.8 38.6 250.1 61.7
14 94.8 40.6 259.1 64.7
20 70.4 28.8 285.4 73.1
45 37.4 16.5 297.6 66.5
55 30.0 14.2 262.2 61.8
100 21.3 14.1 278.3 69.7
200 12.1 12.6 283.7 72.1
350 6.0 15.9 284.0 83.5
450 4.5 12.6 302.4 92.8
ALT-150 Rep 6 464.3 68.0 5.0 0.8
10 318.2 105.1 12.3 7.5
14 251.4 103.4 11.8 7.4
20 160.0 99.7 16.8 11.5
45 86.1 80.1 21.5 16.4
55 58.5 60.8 23.9 13.4
100 31.0 37.6 18.2 18.4
200 24.5 28.0 19.3 15.9
350 3.8 17.3 14.0 11.7
450 9.0 26.8 20.5 19.8
ALT-50 Rep 6 507.6 79.3 6.8 1.9
10 320.5 105.0 13.9 5.1
14 236.7 105.9 26.6 11.1
20 167.4 110.4 27.1 9.6
45 66.8 74.4 28.3 15.0
55 67.0 77.0 55.6 26.4
100 43.9 66.5 46.6 30.6
200 19.8 40.0 54.5 26.2
350 13.0 22.4 19.7 13.4
450 7.8 32.0 40.5 28.2
ALT-17 Rep 6 383.9 45.6 16.1 5.8
10 282.0 74.0 61.9 28.2
14 207.8 86.6 98.8 37.9
20 127.6 72.2 118.5 58.2
45 56.7 58.4 174.1 89.6
55 62.1 52.1 155.6 67.4
100 28.7 37.5 183.6 91.4
200 27.2 40.8 177.0 96.2
350 10.0 33.7 179.9 101.6
450 12.9 34.3 185.4 102.8
R32 ALT-EXT 6 495.9 70.4 0.0 0.2
10 308.5 85.7 0.0 0.1
14 241.5 84.7 0.0 0.9
20 161.3 92.9 0.0 0.9
45 69.8 69.4 0.0 3.0
55 67.1 65.7 0.0 3.5
100 37.4 47.6 0.0 3.2
200 10.1 25.6 0.0 6.1
350 17.8 35.1 0.0 4.8
450 5.1 25.9 0.0 4.7
ALT-350 6 479.1 80.0 0.0 0.2
10 308.8 100.3 1.5 1.3
14 203.7 102.8 7.2 2.5
20 153.1 97.4 9.8 4.9
45 74.8 73.6 11.9 12.3
55 49.8 73.5 10.4 12.0
100 24.4 47.0 8.9 14.4
200 23.0 46.8 6.4 14.5
350 8.9 30.4 6.3 13.4
450 10.1 37.1 7.6 15.2
ALT-150 6 479.7 75.9 3.3 1.3
10 301.8 97.6 12.2 4.3
14 213.1 86.6 14.5 7.5
20 143.8 88.7 5.6 9.7
45 69.3 73.4 17.2 17.5
55 81.9 75.2 18.9 13.9
100 29.8 39.7 20.7 23.9
200 23.3 40.9 22.0 24.7
350 9.1 29.3 25.7 30.8
450 0.0 13.1 22.9 22.2
ALT-75 6 485.8 100.5 10.1 2.8
10 314.0 104.1 18.5 7.1
14 223.4 102.6 27.9 8.9
20 142.0 96.5 36.6 15.3
45 54.5 64.5 29.3 28.7
55 42.7 59.2 49.2 33.5
100 20.8 37.6 32.5 39.3
200 13.1 31.8 47.1 52.9
350 6.5 22.6 45.5 43.0
450 3.9 22.8 48.3 43.4
ALT-50 6 480.0 75.7 5.0 6.2
10 283.5 81.8 28.9 18.0
14 217.4 81.7 22.0 20.8
20 142.1 59.8 51.3 42.8
45 64.2 44.4 60.4 58.4
55 59.0 43.1 76.9 58.6
100 28.0 32.5 59.9 59.9
200 15.8 28.7 59.4 57.9
350 7.9 25.9 60.4 65.4
450 2.6 24.3 64.6 73.2
ALT-17 6 227.9 47.4 142.0 72.4
10 113.6 41.8 92.9 65.4
14 134.9 57.7 121.8 66.2
20 33.4 27.3 154.8 80.0
45 23.1 13.4 164.9 99.7
55 18.2 14.8 165.2 112.5
100 20.1 13.7 197.2 108.3
200 8.4 7.4 164.5 99.9
350 11.4 8.9 155.2 105.3
450 5.7 8.0 188.9 115.9
ALT-10 6 0.0 0.1 287.0 119.1
10 0.0 0.0 313.8 124.4
14 4.7 1.5 336.2 118.7
20 9.2 1.6 295.7 116.1
45 0.0 0.0 301.7 116.0
55 0.0 0.6 312.7 120.0
100 1.5 1.1 299.3 113.6
200 0.0 0.3 325.9 124.6
350 0.0 0.1 292.0 119.6
450 0.0 0.0 336.2 115.9
ALT-150 Rep 6 456.3 71.8 5.0 0.6
10 290.5 91.4 3.0 1.0
14 209.2 87.7 10.1 2.7
20 138.3 91.7 13.9 3.8
45 62.2 66.3 13.2 10.2
55 53.1 51.1 21.1 16.0
100 25.9 27.6 14.1 19.0
200 10.3 17.3 31.0 30.7
350 3.8 9.4 15.3 19.7
450 3.8 11.1 16.5 29.1
ALT-50 Rep 6 443.8 61.5 8.1 5.4
10 308.3 86.0 16.9 4.9
14 200.0 81.5 26.2 6.5
20 140.0 82.0 32.2 12.9
45 54.0 49.6 49.8 35.0
55 59.7 54.8 51.6 24.9
100 36.3 40.7 70.2 55.0
200 18.4 27.0 55.5 50.2
350 6.6 16.0 76.9 61.9
450 5.1 14.1 45.6 46.8
ALT-17 Rep 6 295.6 47.3 82.0 51.5
10 229.8 84.3 58.2 30.6
14 160.5 63.9 93.4 58.3
20 88.8 55.0 115.5 77.2
45 45.9 28.2 165.5 103.9
55 27.0 25.3 172.7 112.6
100 12.8 9.5 177.0 134.2
200 8.7 5.9 219.2 127.6
350 0.0 1.5 188.2 138.8
450 1.4 3.8 201.5 140.5
R33 ALT-EXT 6 426.6 41.8 0.0 0.0
10 323.2 64.4 0.0 0.0
14 254.7 81.7 0.0 0.1
20 176.9 86.9 0.0 0.9
45 68.3 71.5 0.0 2.9
55 76.8 86.1 0.0 0.7
100 29.5 52.9 0.0 5.5
200 23.0 51.0 0.0 3.8
350 5.1 37.6 0.0 4.0
450 10.1 40.4 0.0 3.9
ALT-350 6 519.1 82.7 0.0 0.7
10 334.4 103.9 0.0 1.8
14 241.1 112.3 0.0 2.7
20 175.8 110.0 4.2 3.8
45 82.3 99.8 4.0 9.0
55 48.4 86.3 7.9 14.4
100 36.0 72.2 2.6 16.7
200 19.2 57.9 5.1 17.8
350 8.9 51.7 6.3 21.3
450 5.1 54.8 8.9 23.1
ALT-150 6 473.9 67.7 0.0 1.7
10 322.2 113.4 4.6 7.2
14 218.7 97.6 7.2 8.5
20 168.6 107.3 9.9 13.1
45 66.2 93.2 14.7 24.5
55 63.4 75.1 9.3 22.1
100 32.5 60.1 11.7 26.4
200 16.9 59.5 21.9 30.0
350 12.8 55.2 16.6 31.8
450 6.4 41.4 27.0 35.3
ALT-75 6 476.5 64.0 0.0 2.3
10 311.0 90.7 4.6 5.0
14 246.2 91.7 11.8 11.7
20 159.9 105.6 15.5 15.7
45 56.2 68.7 41.3 41.3
55 52.4 67.8 51.1 41.3
100 32.9 57.1 43.4 48.7
200 11.6 44.6 40.3 46.3
350 7.7 42.0 43.0 52.6
450 9.0 38.7 34.8 50.3
ALT-50 6 454.6 52.5 1.6 3.6
10 317.6 63.0 9.3 6.6
14 212.3 69.5 21.8 9.8
20 149.1 71.2 31.0 13.6
45 69.5 51.3 51.5 25.8
55 67.2 48.3 41.9 25.5
100 36.3 43.6 67.3 28.3
200 14.3 33.0 45.6 36.5
350 6.6 28.1 59.2 35.3
450 6.6 28.5 54.9 37.9
ALT-17 6 383.5 37.6 14.5 7.2
10 258.3 49.9 39.2 18.6
14 183.7 54.1 81.9 23.8
20 109.4 50.7 107.9 42.6
45 38.5 37.0 159.5 68.0
55 43.9 29.5 153.9 69.6
100 12.8 15.5 186.7 81.9
200 7.2 16.4 203.9 89.0
350 0.0 10.2 196.2 90.5
450 7.0 15.1 157.7 84.1
ALT-10 6 388.3 38.4 12.4 2.7
10 240.2 43.8 60.7 9.7
14 136.1 43.0 152.7 34.9
20 41.4 18.8 234.5 35.4
45 30.5 24.5 230.0 46.3
55 22.0 18.1 241.5 42.1
100 18.2 14.2 281.3 48.5
200 4.5 9.4 271.1 69.9
350 3.1 9.0 311.1 51.9
450 3.0 9.3 288.7 62.7
ALT-150 Rep 6 429.5 39.1 0.0 0.1
10 298.2 65.7 3.0 0.7
14 228.3 75.8 5.8 2.5
20 169.7 81.2 5.6 5.5
45 90.3 75.5 20.2 12.6
55 55.6 58.9 26.4 19.1
100 18.0 37.2 12.8 26.2
200 19.3 31.4 25.9 27.5
350 16.8 31.7 23.2 27.7
450 11.5 38.0 17.9 31.5
ALT-50 Rep 6 422.3 36.0 0.0 0.1
10 300.9 57.0 0.0 0.1
14 220.1 68.7 7.3 0.9
20 168.4 75.7 21.3 5.3
45 76.1 56.4 43.4 17.6
55 62.0 59.8 44.4 16.0
100 40.2 44.7 60.3 27.6
200 11.8 34.5 61.9 33.2
350 11.8 39.9 56.3 37.5
450 10.5 29.1 48.3 29.0
ALT-17 Rep 6 388.6 36.9 4.8 2.5
10 251.8 62.5 54.5 13.6
14 191.3 48.9 74.2 22.1
20 107.3 43.5 134.2 46.9
45 36.1 25.9 173.3 51.1
55 30.2 20.7 172.9 58.1
100 31.5 19.1 179.7 56.5
200 5.7 15.3 188.8 64.5
350 11.3 17.1 172.1 56.9
450 4.2 15.6 176.1 63.4
R34 ALT-EXT 6 496.3 78.7 0.0 0.0
10 306.5 115.8 0.0 0.0
14 256.8 131.8 0.0 0.1
20 170.6 115.9 0.0 0.2
45 79.4 89.5 0.0 0.6
55 58.7 83.0 0.0 0.6
100 26.8 39.3 0.0 0.6
200 21.6 31.3 0.0 0.6
350 8.8 15.5 0.0 0.3
450 14.0 31.1 0.0 0.5
ALT-350 6 519.4 109.9 1.7 0.6
10 316.4 118.0 3.1 1.6
14 229.6 119.3 2.9 4.0
20 159.2 118.6 8.4 5.6
45 85.5 96.7 5.4 10.0
55 50.0 64.3 7.8 10.1
100 24.5 41.7 11.6 11.4
200 14.0 27.3 10.3 12.2
350 10.2 19.6 8.9 10.5
450 3.8 28.9 7.6 10.8
ALT-150 6 491.7 88.0 0.0 0.2
10 279.1 121.8 7.5 5.4
14 232.9 107.0 20.7 4.0
20 147.1 107.2 23.9 12.2
45 59.9 69.7 26.5 15.0
55 29.8 38.7 23.3 14.6
100 31.0 46.1 16.8 14.0
200 19.2 27.1 19.3 13.1
350 9.0 23.9 25.6 13.1
450 2.5 17.8 20.4 9.4
ALT-75 6 457.6 82.6 1.7 1.4
10 319.5 119.7 26.4 5.1
14 223.3 105.6 35.2 10.5
20 138.9 88.1 35.1 15.3
45 76.0 72.2 46.2 24.2
55 62.7 64.0 32.1 23.9
100 18.3 34.8 47.3 23.6
200 9.1 22.3 41.6 22.2
350 7.8 20.6 41.7 16.9
450 5.2 20.8 34.8 18.1
ALT-50 6 444.6 65.6 18.4 3.1
10 299.0 85.8 35.5 8.9
14 197.9 70.5 57.4 10.8
20 131.8 64.6 49.7 13.0
45 61.9 43.8 48.5 14.0
55 42.6 32.7 48.0 14.3
100 22.7 32.8 58.4 15.8
200 15.9 26.1 47.3 14.3
350 7.7 20.5 47.3 14.7
450 14.4 24.0 43.1 12.0
ALT-17 6 251.6 42.6 109.7 22.2
10 178.8 45.6 145.5 27.9
14 124.2 37.1 139.0 33.7
20 76.5 19.1 176.5 41.6
45 53.9 22.4 178.6 44.1
55 35.1 15.4 202.4 42.7
100 31.8 13.5 184.2 48.5
200 11.3 12.7 178.4 47.0
350 8.7 9.4 215.8 54.4
450 5.6 10.0 165.3 46.4
ALT-10 6 141.5 23.6 209.0 31.2
10 103.3 36.6 247.2 42.0
14 45.8 23.8 270.0 42.7
20 29.3 13.2 288.2 46.1
45 12.1 7.5 290.7 43.3
55 4.5 5.6 308.0 52.5
100 4.6 2.7 309.2 48.4
200 4.5 6.0 304.3 48.6
350 3.0 3.9 301.4 50.9
450 0.0 2.5 308.5 44.8
ALT-150 Rep 6 463.6 67.2 1.7 0.4
10 305.2 98.1 3.1 1.5
14 216.1 89.6 11.6 4.1
20 141.4 61.8 11.1 6.8
45 70.4 55.9 13.2 9.1
55 52.5 60.8 18.4 16.4
100 33.6 33.4 13.0 14.9
200 15.3 37.0 11.6 8.5
350 14.1 29.0 16.7 11.6
450 12.9 22.2 18.0 13.6
ALT-50 Rep 6 464.4 76.0 5.0 0.6
10 325.2 97.7 7.8 1.9
14 206.8 90.1 16.0 5.2
20 160.6 107.3 37.2 10.1
45 65.2 64.6 47.4 20.5
55 52.5 58.5 48.4 17.8
100 27.7 34.3 53.0 18.6
200 5.2 17.1 73.2 27.4
350 10.4 21.2 43.1 28.0
450 13.0 23.8 51.2 20.1
ALT-17 Rep 6 419.3 59.1 18.2 2.0
10 200.7 47.7 105.0 27.4
14 131.9 47.8 112.6 29.1
20 85.6 41.4 146.7 38.8
45 41.5 26.3 168.5 48.0
55 21.4 10.4 178.2 49.6
100 28.2 20.6 164.1 48.1
200 11.4 13.9 196.4 51.8
350 8.4 14.9 176.5 49.0
450 8.6 11.9 191.3 48.8
R35 ALT-EXT 6 266.9 14.2 0.0 0.1
10 249.5 28.0 0.0 1.5
14 186.5 25.7 0.0 4.7
20 104.8 20.7 0.0 4.8
45 64.8 17.0 0.0 5.2
55 45.2 20.4 0.0 5.0
100 34.7 13.1 0.0 3.8
200 21.7 8.3 0.0 1.6
350 10.1 6.8 0.0 1.3
450 7.6 6.6 0.0 1.1
ALT-350 6 282.6 18.7 1.5 0.2
10 264.6 42.3 7.4 6.0
14 199.9 42.0 4.3 7.2
20 137.5 32.5 5.5 6.3
45 85.2 29.8 6.7 9.5
55 68.7 32.0 6.5 8.8
100 37.6 24.5 7.7 9.3
200 19.3 23.7 10.2 9.2
350 16.8 26.3 12.9 11.5
450 11.4 25.5 3.8 8.1
ALT-150 6 223.2 10.1 4.4 1.7
10 204.1 14.7 11.5 5.9
14 150.7 19.0 15.4 9.9
20 125.6 20.2 6.8 13.8
45 68.0 21.2 20.1 17.2
55 55.6 22.5 18.5 18.3
100 40.4 18.3 18.3 17.1
200 15.5 18.4 24.6 16.6
350 16.7 17.5 20.5 18.7
450 3.8 15.1 20.4 17.6
ALT-75 6 193.9 6.8 7.1 2.1
10 182.2 11.8 14.4 6.1
14 145.6 13.4 26.7 11.9
20 105.5 12.8 31.5 14.7
45 71.4 17.4 39.1 22.3
55 45.5 15.4 41.2 23.1
100 32.7 15.6 34.1 24.5
200 15.7 14.9 37.8 22.1
350 10.4 12.9 37.5 24.8
450 11.8 12.2 45.8 26.8
ALT-50 6 261.6 19.9 18.6 4.2
10 252.1 33.2 31.6 9.6
14 175.6 17.1 25.8 5.9
20 130.6 17.0 43.7 9.7
45 60.5 18.0 43.0 14.5
55 41.2 13.3 46.5 15.7
100 48.0 14.3 48.3 14.5
200 13.1 14.8 51.2 16.1
350 9.1 12.8 46.8 16.1
450 6.6 12.9 68.4 16.5
ALT-17 6 167.8 7.2 70.0 13.9
10 93.9 5.4 100.9 17.9
14 81.3 7.2 104.6 24.7
20 46.5 4.4 141.8 23.4
45 28.0 6.1 147.7 29.5
55 21.2 5.2 162.1 32.4
100 22.3 4.3 142.2 27.5
200 15.3 7.1 146.1 31.3
350 4.2 4.0 165.0 30.9
450 5.6 5.0 153.0 35.0
ALT-10 6 148.4 15.8 153.4 52.0
10 87.7 16.4 198.2 58.0
14 33.2 8.9 248.2 73.0
20 42.4 11.0 208.9 68.0
45 27.0 10.0 257.6 76.8
55 20.7 8.0 237.9 55.2
100 8.9 6.5 247.9 59.8
200 10.5 10.3 275.9 92.1
350 5.8 6.0 254.0 54.9
450 3.0 7.3 272.8 80.8
ALT-150 Rep 6 303.1 29.6 1.5 1.0
10 168.9 24.2 8.7 4.1
14 161.7 35.8 11.3 8.0
20 104.6 29.6 15.1 9.9
45 50.4 28.4 27.7 17.7
55 37.9 28.2 11.7 11.0
100 24.5 19.2 12.9 9.9
200 8.9 9.8 14.0 8.5
350 19.2 15.9 11.6 9.9
450 1.3 13.7 12.7 10.7
ALT-50 Rep 6 269.8 22.9 15.7 5.2
10 219.8 34.1 42.0 17.1
14 144.4 40.8 55.6 22.2
20 133.3 40.0 50.8 28.2
45 50.0 28.3 36.1 23.6
55 48.3 25.5 50.2 25.9
100 23.3 14.9 25.3 21.2
200 27.9 29.6 61.8 44.3
350 15.7 23.3 51.1 42.3
450 11.6 14.4 32.9 24.7
ALT-17 Rep 6 194.0 13.2 59.0 14.6
10 146.8 26.1 57.9 20.4
14 74.5 19.2 100.3 45.0
20 59.7 16.4 138.6 36.6
45 49.6 18.5 145.0 62.2
55 33.8 15.5 121.7 62.5
100 26.6 18.3 144.2 45.4
200 18.2 17.3 155.7 67.8
350 4.0 7.9 142.1 50.7
450 4.2 13.4 163.7 64.8
R36 ALT-EXT 6 445.4 74.1 0.0 0.0
10 319.3 96.3 0.0 0.0
14 231.0 105.8 0.0 0.3
20 170.6 97.9 0.0 0.4
45 82.6 64.3 0.0 1.6
55 53.5 51.3 0.0 1.2
100 28.1 19.7 0.0 1.0
200 17.9 15.7 0.0 1.7
350 15.2 18.9 0.0 0.9
450 7.6 12.8 0.0 1.0
ALT-350 6 456.6 66.6 0.0 0.3
10 311.6 92.4 7.6 1.4
14 205.4 74.3 1.5 0.9
20 165.3 91.7 7.1 2.6
45 52.1 50.1 1.3 2.0
55 30.1 39.2 6.6 2.7
100 23.3 32.4 1.3 2.2
200 8.9 18.6 7.6 2.5
350 8.9 17.3 10.3 2.8
450 2.5 11.0 1.3 1.8
ALT-150 6 446.7 84.5 0.0 0.1
10 326.9 117.0 0.0 0.7
14 226.1 92.2 0.0 1.2
20 118.7 70.6 12.2 2.6
45 58.2 42.6 14.5 2.6
55 27.4 23.7 9.1 2.1
100 31.1 36.9 6.5 2.5
200 16.6 20.5 6.3 2.9
350 12.8 19.4 15.3 3.6
450 5.1 13.3 6.3 1.2
ALT-75 6 419.0 58.2 9.4 0.9
10 304.0 72.5 15.3 3.5
14 142.1 49.4 18.5 3.3
20 124.8 58.0 34.6 7.1
45 41.6 29.5 31.7 7.1
55 31.7 20.1 46.4 8.0
100 9.1 13.3 29.7 5.7
200 18.3 19.3 29.8 7.8
350 7.9 11.0 39.0 8.4
450 3.9 10.5 28.3 5.9
ALT-50 6 421.6 74.6 40.1 10.8
10 317.6 82.4 35.8 12.2
14 217.8 70.4 56.9 16.9
20 139.7 51.1 45.2 15.9
45 74.6 39.8 70.4 17.0
55 43.6 19.9 27.7 9.6
100 23.6 19.2 44.9 13.8
200 11.6 15.1 36.2 10.3
350 5.2 10.6 34.9 8.8
450 10.4 14.4 48.2 13.2
ALT-17 6 409.3 68.2 40.9 7.2
10 203.9 61.2 70.4 11.0
14 203.7 72.0 42.6 8.4
20 98.0 44.6 89.3 20.4
45 52.2 32.7 125.0 24.8
55 42.3 24.5 133.5 27.4
100 25.1 20.4 139.4 31.9
200 19.8 19.5 163.7 41.4
350 8.3 11.1 139.7 33.4
450 4.0 8.2 129.7 33.0
ALT-10 6 0.0 0.1 290.3 52.7
10 55.3 13.9 245.5 53.7
14 0.0 0.1 286.9 58.0
20 0.0 0.0 299.6 62.8
45 3.0 0.6 287.7 65.5
55 4.5 1.7 259.3 52.2
100 4.3 2.4 285.1 60.9
200 0.0 0.7 286.4 59.1
350 0.0 0.4 277.9 60.0
450 0.0 0.1 299.0 57.8
ALT-150 Rep 6 336.8 48.6 1.7 0.2
10 306.8 89.7 0.0 0.2
14 226.9 92.2 7.3 1.1
20 114.1 70.8 4.2 2.9
45 43.7 38.2 10.6 4.1
55 49.9 41.1 18.4 10.5
100 28.5 24.6 18.2 7.8
200 5.1 5.5 7.6 2.5
350 7.6 8.4 8.9 3.5
450 3.8 9.6 15.2 7.1
ALT-50 Rep 6 414.9 54.6 1.6 0.1
10 301.3 90.1 1.5 0.6
14 221.1 95.0 2.9 2.0
20 145.6 91.4 22.3 5.4
45 63.2 55.9 41.7 11.8
55 53.4 35.9 40.2 16.2
100 18.5 15.3 50.2 17.8
200 13.3 13.3 56.7 22.9
350 2.5 11.6 24.6 13.4
450 7.8 10.4 44.6 22.2
ALT-17 Rep 6 285.9 33.9 50.7 19.8
10 247.5 78.9 31.6 11.7
14 160.0 66.8 65.8 20.8
20 79.6 38.3 123.5 42.6
45 16.8 10.4 168.1 52.3
55 21.0 9.8 157.8 52.3
100 8.4 8.3 176.4 49.6
200 18.4 12.3 168.3 54.7
350 4.2 5.9 153.7 53.0
450 6.9 7.5 157.7 59.0

REFERENCES

  1. Baum W.M. On two types of deviation from the matching law: Undermatching and bias. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1974;22:231–242. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Baum W.M. Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1979;32:269–281. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.32-269. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Baum W.M. Performance on ratio and interval schedules of reinforcement: Data and theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1993;59:245–264. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.59-245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Belke T.W, Heyman G.M. Increasing and signaling background reinforcement: Effect on the foreground response-reinforcer relation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1994;61:65–81. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bradshaw C.M. Suppression of response rates in variable-interval schedules by a concurrent schedule of reinforcement. British Journal of Psychology. 1977;68:473–480. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bradshaw C.M, Ruddle H.V, Szabadi E. Relationship between response rate and reinforcement frequency in variable-interval schedules: II. Effect of the volume of sucrose reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1981;35:263–269. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.35-263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bradshaw C.M, Szabadi E, Bevan P. Behavior of humans in variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1976;26:135–141. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bradshaw C.M, Szabadi E, Bevan P. Relationship between response rate and reinforcement frequency in variable-interval schedules: The effect of the concentration of sucrose reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1978;29:447–452. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.29-447. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Bradshaw C.M, Szabadi E, Ruddle H.V, Pears E. Effect of deprivation level on performance in variable-interval schedules. Behaviour Analysis Letters. 1983;3:267–273. [Google Scholar]
  10. Dallery J, McDowell J.J, Lancaster J.S. Falsification of matching theory's account of single-alternative responding: Herrnstein's k varies with sucrose concentration. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 2000;73:23–43. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2000.73-23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Dallery J, McDowell J.J, Soto P.L. The measurement and functional properties of reinforcer value in single-alternative responding: A test of linear system theory. The Psychological Record. 2004;54:45–65. [Google Scholar]
  12. Dallery J, Soto P.L. Herrnstein's hyperbola and behavioral pharmacology: Review and critique. Behavioural Pharmacology. 2004;15:443–459. doi: 10.1097/00008877-200411000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. de Villiers P.A, Herrnstein R.J. Toward a law of response strength. Psychological Bulletin. 1976;83:1131–1153. [Google Scholar]
  14. Fleshler M, Hoffman H.S. A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1962;5:529–530. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Hamilton A.L, Stellar J.R, Hart E.B. Reward, performance, and the response strength method in self-stimulating rats: Validation and neuroleptics. Physiology and Behavior. 1985;35:897–904. doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(85)90257-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Herrnstein R.J. On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1970;13:243–266. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Heyman G.M, Monaghan M.M. Effect of changes in response requirement and deprivation on the parameters of the matching law equation: New data and review. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1987;13:384–394. [Google Scholar]
  18. Heyman G.M, Monaghan M.M. Reinforcer magnitude (sucrose concentration) and the matching law theory of response strength. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1994;61:505–516. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-505. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Keesey R.E. Duration of stimulation and the reward properties of hypothalamic stimulation. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology. 1964;58:201–207. doi: 10.1037/h0043134. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. McDowell J.J. On the falsifiability of matching theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1986;45:63–74. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1986.45-63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. McDowell J.J. On the classic and modern theories of matching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 2005;84:111–127. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2005.59-04. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. McDowell J.J, Dallery J. Falsification of matching theory: Changes in the asymptote of Herrnstein's hyperbola as a function of water deprivation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1999;72:251–268. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1999.72-251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. McDowell J.J, Wood H.M. Confirmation of linear system theory predictions: Rate of change of Herrnstein's k as a function of changes in reinforcer magnitude. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1984;41:183–192. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. McDowell J.J, Wood H.M. Confirmation of linear system theory predictions: Rate of change of Herrnstein's k as a function of response-force requirement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 1985;43:61–73. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.43-61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Snyderman M. Body weight and response strength. Behaviour Analysis Letters. 1983;3:255–265. [Google Scholar]
  26. Wearden J.H. Bias and undermatching: Implications for Herrnstein's equation. Behaviour Analysis Letters. 1981;1:177–185. [Google Scholar]
  27. White K.G, McLean A.P, Aldiss M.F. The context for reinforcement: Modulation of the response-reinforcer relation by concurrently available extraneous reinforcement. Animal Learning & Behavior. 1986;14:398–404. [Google Scholar]
  28. Williams B.A. Reinforcement, choice, and response strength. In: Atkinson R.C, Herrnstein R.J, Lindzey G, Luce R.D, editors. Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology: Vol. 2. New York: Wiley; 1988. (2nd ed., pp. 167–244) [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES