Three tests of 'anticipatory responding' as an account for induction produced by upcoming food-pellet reinforcement.
Previous research has demonstrated that rats' rates of lever pressing for low-concentration liquid-sucrose reinforcers are increased when food-pellet, rather than sucrose, reinforcement will be upcoming in the same session (i.e. induction). The present experiments were designed to determine whether this induction was the product of 'anticipatory responses' for the upcoming food pellets being added to the responses being made for the currently available sucrose reinforcement. Experiment 1 tested this idea by summing sucrose-reinforced responding and 'anticipatory responding' from different conditions and comparing the sum to responding from a third condition in which subjects responded for sucrose when food-pellet reinforcement was upcoming. The comparison yielded similar response rates. Experiment 2 employed a blackout, of different durations in different conditions, to delay the upcoming food-pellet reinforcement. Consistent with the anticipatory-responding account, the delay decreased the size of the induction. However, results from the blackouts were not entirely consistent with the anticipatory-responding explanation. Experiment 3 provided, in some conditions, sucrose and food-pellet reinforcement in the first and second halves of the session, respectively, for responding on separate levers. These conditions separated 'anticipatory responses' for the food pellets from responses for the sucrose reinforcers. However, induction in responding for sucrose was still present. Together, these experiments demonstrate that, although anticipatory responses may contribute to induction in some instances, they are not solely responsible for the effect.
Weatherly
J N.
JN
Department of Psychology, University of North Dakota, 58202-8380, Grand Forks, ND, USA
Himle
M B.
MB
Plumm
K M.
KM
Moulton
P L.
PL