Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 2001 Jul;76(1):43–74. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.76-43

Variable-ratio versus variable-interval schedules: response rate, resistance to change, and preference.

J A Nevin 1, Randolph 1, S Holland 1, A P McLean 1
PMCID: PMC1285019  PMID: 11516115

Abstract

Two experiments asked whether resistance to change depended on variable-ratio as opposed to variable-interval contingencies of reinforcement and the different response rates they establish. In Experiment 1, pigeons were trained on multiple random-ratio random-interval schedules with equated reinforcer rates. Baseline response rates were disrupted by intercomponent food, extinction, and prefeeding. Resistance to change relative to baseline was greater in the interval component, and the difference was correlated with the extent to which baseline response rates were higher in the ratio component. In Experiment 2, pigeons were trained on multiple variable-ratio variable-interval schedules in one half of each session and on concurrent chains in the other half in which the terminal links corresponded to the multiple-schedule components. The schedules were varied over six conditions, including two with equated reinforcer rates. In concurrent chains, preference strongly overmatched the ratio of obtained reinforcer rates. In multiple schedules, relative resistance to response-independent food during intercomponent intervals, extinction, and intercomponent food plus extinction depended on the ratio of obtained reinforcer rates but was less sensitive than was preference. When reinforcer rates were similar, both preference and relative resistance were greater for the variable-interval schedule, and the differences were correlated with the extent to which baseline response rates were higher on the variable-ratio schedule, confirming the results of Experiment 1. These results demonstrate that resistance to change and preference depend in part on response rate as well as obtained reinforcer rate, and challenge the independence of resistance to change and preference with respect to response rate proposed by behavioral momentum theory.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (342.5 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Baum W. M. Performances on ratio and interval schedules of reinforcement: Data and theory. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Mar;59(2):245–264. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.59-245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bell M. Pavlovian contingencies and resistance to change in a multiple schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1999 Jul;72(1):81–96. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1999.72-81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Blackman D. Response rate, reinforcement frequency, and conditioned suppression. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Sep;11(5):503–516. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-503. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. FLESHLER M., HOFFMAN H. S. A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Oct;5:529–530. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fath S. J., Fields L., Malott M. K., Grossett D. Response rate, latency, and resistance to change. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Mar;39(2):267–274. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.39-267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Grace R. C. A contextual model of concurrent-chains choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 Jan;61(1):113–129. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Grace R. C. A contextual model of concurrent-chains choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 Jan;61(1):113–129. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Grace R. C., Nevin J. A. Comparing preference and resistance to change in constant- and variable-duration schedule components. J Exp Anal Behav. 2000 Sep;74(2):165–188. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-165. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Grace R., Schwendiman J., Nevin J. Effects of unsignaled delay of reinforcement on preference and resistance to change. J Exp Anal Behav. 1998 May;69(3):247–261. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1998.69-247. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. HERRNSTEIN R. J. SECONDARY REINFORCEMENT AND RATE OF PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 Jan;7:27–36. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1964.7-27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Hursh S. R. Behavioral economics. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Nov;42(3):435–452. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-435. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hursh S. R., Winger G. Normalized demand for drugs and other reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 Nov;64(3):373–384. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.64-373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lattal K., Reilly M., Kohn J. Response persistence under ratio and interval reinforcement schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1998 Sep;70(2):165–183. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1998.70-165. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. McSweeney F. K., Farmer V. A., Dougan J. D., Whipple J. E. The generalized matching law as a description of multiple-schedule responding. J Exp Anal Behav. 1986 Jan;45(1):83–101. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1986.45-83. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Nevin J. A. An integrative model for the study of behavioral momentum. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 May;57(3):301–316. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Nevin J. A. Behavioral economics and behavioral momentum. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 Nov;64(3):385–395. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.64-385. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Nevin J. A., Grace R. C. Behavioral momentum and the law of effect. Behav Brain Sci. 2000 Feb;23(1):73–130. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x00002405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Nevin J. A., Grace R. C. Does the context of reinforcement affect resistance to change? J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1999 Apr;25(2):256–268. doi: 10.1037//0097-7403.25.2.256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Nevin J. A., Grace R. C. Preference and resistance to change with constant-duration schedule components. J Exp Anal Behav. 2000 Jul;74(1):79–100. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Nevin J. A., Mandell C., Atak J. R. The analysis of behavioral momentum. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Jan;39(1):49–59. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.39-49. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Nevin J. A. Response strength in multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 May;21(3):389–408. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Nevin J. A., Tota M. E., Torquato R. D., Shull R. L. Alternative reinforcement increases resistance to change: Pavlovian or operant contingencies? J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 May;53(3):359–379. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1990.53-359. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Zuriff G. E. A comparison of variable-ratio and variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 May;13(3):369–374. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES