RESPONDING OF PIGEONS UNDER VARIABLE‐INTERVAL SCHEDULES OF UNSIGNALED, BRIEFLY SIGNALED, AND COMPLETELY SIGNALED DELAYS TO REINFORCEMENT

In Experiment 1, three pigeons' key pecking was maintained under a variable‐interval 60‐s schedule of food reinforcement. A 1‐s unsignaled nonresetting delay to reinforcement was then added. Rates decreased and stabilized at values below those observed under immediate‐reinforcement conditions. A brief stimulus change (key lit red for 0.5 s) was then arranged to follow immediately the peck that began the delay. Response rates quickly returned to baseline levels. Subsequently, rates near baseline levels were maintained with briefly signaled delays of 3 and 9 s. When a 27‐s briefly signaled delay was instituted, response rates decreased to low levels. In Experiment 2, four pigeons' responding was first maintained under a multiple variable‐interval 60‐s (green key) variable‐interval 60‐s (red key) schedule. Response rates in both components fell to low levels when a 3‐s unsignaled delay was added. In the first component delays were then briefly signaled in the same manner as Experiment 1, and in the second component they were signaled with a change in key color that remained until food was delivered. Response rates increased to near baseline levels in both components, and remained near baseline when the delays in both components were lengthened to 9 s. When delays were lengthened to 27 s, response rates fell to low levels in the briefly signaled delay component for three of four pigeons while remaining at or near baseline in the completely signaled delay component. In Experiment 3, low response rates under a 9‐s unsignaled delay to reinforcement (tandem variable‐interval 60 s fixed‐time 9 s) increased when the delay was briefly signaled. The role of the brief stimulus as conditioned reinforcement may be a function of its temporal relation to food, and thus may be related to the eliciting function of the stimulus.