Premium
EFFECTS OF d‐ AMPHETAMINE ON RESPONDING UNDER SECOND‐ORDER SCHEDULES OF REINFORCEMENT WITH PAIRED AND NONPAIRED BRIEF STIMULI
Author(s) -
Cohen Steven L.
Publication year - 1991
Publication title -
journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.75
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1938-3711
pISSN - 0022-5002
DOI - 10.1901/jeab.1991.56-289
Subject(s) - reinforcement , amphetamine , psychology , cognitive psychology , neuroscience , social psychology , dopamine
Three pigeons were studied under a multiple schedule in which pecks in each component were reinforced according to a variable‐interval 120‐s second‐order schedule with fixed‐interval 60‐s units. In the first component of the multiple schedule, the completion of a fixed interval produced either food or a 4‐s change in key color plus houselight illumination. In the second component an identical schedule was in effect, but the stimulus was a 0.3‐s change in key color. Both long and short brief stimuli were not paired with food presentations in Conditions 1 and 3 and were paired with food in Condition 2. There were no consistent differences in response patterns under paired and nonpaired brief‐stimulus conditions when the stimulus was a 4‐s change in key color accompanied by houselight illumination. However, pairing the 0.3‐s key‐color change with food presentations resulted in higher indices of curvature and lower response rates in the early segments of the fixed interval than when the stimulus was not paired with food presentations. Low doses of d ‐amphetamine (0.3 and 1 mg/kg) produced small and inconsistent increases in overall response rates, and higher doses (3 and 10 mg/kg) decreased overall response rates. d ‐Amphetamine altered response patterns within fixed intervals by decreasing the indices of curvature and increasing response rates in the early segments of the fixed interval. Response rates and patterns under paired and nonpaired brief‐stimulus conditions were not differentially affected by d ‐amphetamine. Thus, evidence for the enhancement of the conditioned reinforcement effects of psychomotor stimulant drugs was not found with the second‐order schedules used in the present study.