Advertisement

The Psychological Record

, Volume 40, Issue 1, pp 139–151 | Cite as

Effects of Interreinforcement Interval on Dimensions of Schedule-Induced Polydipsia: Group and Individual Differences

  • Emoke Jozsvai
  • J. D. Keehn
Article

Abstract

Schedules of reinforcement have direct (response strengthening) and indirect (response inducing) effects. This report describes group and individual differences among rats in the indirect effect of interreinforcement interval (IRI) on schedule-induced drinking. Four weight-matched groups of food- but not water-deprived rats were each given 20 training sessions in which food pellets were delivered independently of responses at fixed times of 30 s (Group 1), 60 s (Group 2), 120 s (Group 3), and 240 s (Group 4). Percentages of IRIs with at least 1 lick, total amount drunk, licks per IRI, and latencies of drinks were recorded. In group comparisons, water intake per IRI related bitonically to this interval such that the group with the shortest IRI drank as frequently as the middle groups but with drinks of smaller magnitude, whereas the group with the longest interval drank less frequently than the middle groups but with drinks of similar magnitude. In general, the relative contributions of drink frequency and drink magnitude to total water intake depended on individual animals regardless of IRI, but latency of drinking from IRI onset was a direct function of interval length regardless of individual animals.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BOND, N. (1973). Schedule-induced polydipsia as a function of the consummately rate. The Psychological Record, 23, 377–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BOND, N. (1976). Schedule-induced polydipsia as a function of the interval between food pellets. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 7, 139–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. BOLLES, R. C. (1959). Group and individual performance as a function of intensity and kind of deprivation. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 52, 579–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. COHEN, P. S., LOONEY, T. A., CAMPAGNONI, F. R., & LAWLER, C. P. (1985). A two-state model of reinforcer-induced motivation. In F. R. Brush & J. B. Overmier (Eds.), Affect, conditioning and cognition: Essays on the determinants of behavior (pp. 281–297). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. COLOTLA, V. A., Keehn, J. D., & Gardner, L. L. (1970). Control of schedule-induced drink durations by interpellet intervals. Psychonomic Science, 21, 137–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. FALK, J. L. (1961). Production of polydipsia in normal rats by an intermittent food schedule. Science, 133, 195–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. FALK, J. L. (1966). Schedule induced polydipsia as a function of fixed interval length. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 37–39.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. FALK, J. L. (1972). The nature and determinants of adjunctive behavior. In R. M. Gilbert & J. D. Keehn (Eds.), Schedule effects: Drugs, drinking and aggression (pp. 148–173). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  9. FLORY, R. K. (1971). The control of schedule-induced polydipsia: Frequency and magnitude of reinforcement. Learning and Motivation, 2, 215–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. FREED, W. J., & MENDELSON, J. (1979). Control of drinking-bout magnitude in schedule-induced polydipsia by interpellet-interval duration. Animal Learning & Behavior, 7, 489–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. GILBERT, T. F. (1958). Fundamental dimensional properties of the operant. Psychological Review, 65, 272–282.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. HAWKINS, T. D., SCHROT, J. F., GITHENS, S. H., & EVERETT, P. B. (1972). Schedule-induced polydipsia: An analysis of water and alcohol ingestion. In R. M. Gilbert & J. D. Keehn (Eds.), Schedule effects: Drugs, drinking and aggression (pp. 95–128). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  13. KEEHN, J. D., & COLOTLA, V. A. (1971). Schedule-induced drinking as a function of inter-pellet interval. Psychonomic Science, 23, 69–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. KEEHN, J. D., & JOZSVAI, E. (1989). Topographical differences between schedule-induced and prandial drinking by rats. The Psychological Record, 39, 247–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. KEEHN, J. D., & STOYANOV, E. (1983). Disruption of adjunctive drinking by lick-dependent delays in reinforcement. The Psychological Record, 33, 391–400.Google Scholar
  16. KEEHN, J. D., & STOYANOV, E. (1986). The development of adjunctive drinking by rats: Conditioned and unconditioned components. Animal Learning & Behavior, 14, 411–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. KILLEEN, P. R. (1975). On the temporal control of behavior. Psychological Review, 82, 89–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. PELLON, R., & BLACKMAN, D. E. (1987). Punishment of schedule-induced drinking in rats by signalled and unsignalled delays in food presentation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 48, 417–434.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. ROPER, T. J. (1980). Changes in rate of schedule-induced behaviour in rats as a function of fixed-interval schedule. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. ROSELLINI, R. A., & BURDETTE, D. R. (1980). Meal size and intermeal interval both regulate schedule-induced water intake by rats. Animal Learning & Behavior, 8, 647–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. SHURTLEFF, D., DELAMATER, A. R., & RILEY, A. L. (1983). A revaluation of the CS- hypothesis for schedule-induced polydipsia under intermittent schedules of pellet delivery. Animal Learning & Behavior, 11, 247–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. SKINNER, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  23. STADDON, J. E. R., & AYRES, S. L. (1975). Sequential and temporal properties of behavior induced by a schedule of periodic food delivery. Behaviour, 54, 26–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. STADDON, J. E. R., & SIMMELHAG, V. L (1971). The “superstition” experiment: A reexamination of its implications for the principles of adaptive behavior. Psychological Review, 78, 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. WETHERINGTON, C. L. (1979). Schedule-induced drinking: Rate of food delivery and Herrnstein’s equation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32, 323–333.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavior Analysis International 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emoke Jozsvai
    • 1
  • J. D. Keehn
    • 1
  1. 1.Atkinson College, York UniversityNorth YorkCanada

Personalised recommendations