Cristiano Valerio dos Santos

Temporal discrimination and delayed reinforcement

We attempted to determine the effect of reinforcement delay on time discrimination in an interval bisection task. Three groups of rats were exposed to immediate, delayed reinforcement and longer signals with immediate reinforcement in acquisition and test. Results show differences in the amount of training necessary to reach the acquisition criteria, the Weber fraction and the range or overall stimulus control. The results suggest an increased difficulty to discriminate the difference among durations rather than an increase in estimated time as main effect of delayed reinforcement.

Impulsive mechanisms influencing relapse in alcohol drinking

Impulsivity has been related to different features of addictive behaviors. Growing data, generated in separated lines of research, suggest that different processes underlying impulsivity are associated to relapse in alcohol drinking. Considering the evidence, relapse can be understood as an impulsive choice or as an impulsive action. In the first case, the return to drinking behavior is a consequence of insensitive to delayed consequence, that is, to the discounting of delayed rewards. In the second case, relapse is a consequence of failures to inhibit prepotent responses. Nevertheless, conditions that control the action of each mechanism or their interaction to influence relapse still unknown. We hypothesize that both mechanisms interact to produce relapse depending on framing effects, the moments of a drinking episode or context. The implication of the hypothesis is that relapse prevention strategies need to reduce discounting rate, but also to increase behavioral inhibition in the presence of cues related to alcohol.

Reinforcement value and fixed-interval performance

The concept of reinforcement value summarizes the effect of different variables, such as reinforcement delay, reinforcement magnitude, and deprivation level, on behavior. In the present set of experiments, we evaluated the effect of reinforcement devaluation on performance under FI schedules. The literature on timing and reinforcement value suggests that devaluation generates longer expected times to reinforcement than the same intervals trained under control conditions. We devalued reinforcement with delay in Experiments 1A, 1B, and 2, and diminished deprivation in Experiments 3A and 3B. Devaluation reduced response rates, increased the number of one-response intervals, and lengthened postreinforcement pauses, but had inconsistent effects on other timing measures such as quarter life and breakpoint. The results of delayed reinforcement and diminished deprivation manipulations are well summarized as reinforcement devaluation effects. These results suggest that devaluation may reduce stimulus control. In addition, we argue that the process by which delayed reinforcement affects behavior might also explain some effects observed in other devaluation procedures through the concept of reinforcement value.

The absence of numbers to express the amount may affect delay discounting with humans.

Human delay discounting is usually studied with experimental protocols that use symbols to express delay and amount. In order to further understand discounting, we evaluated whether the absence of numbers to represent reward amounts affects discount rate in general, and whether the magnitude effect is generalized to nonsymbolic situations in particular. In Experiment 1, human participants were exposed to a delay-discounting task in which rewards were presented using dots to represent monetary rewards (nonsymbolic); under this condition the magnitude effect did not occur. Nevertheless, the magnitude effect was observed when equivalent reward amounts were presented using numbers (symbolic). Moreover, in estimation tasks, magnitude increments produced underestimation of large amounts. In Experiment 2, participants were exposed only to the nonsymbolic discounting task and were required to estimate reward amounts in each trial. Consistent with Experiment 1, the absence of numbers representing reward amounts produced similar discount rates of small and large rewards. These results suggest that value of nonsymbolic rewards is a nonlinear function of amount and that value attribution depends on perceived difference between the immediate and the delayed nonsymbolic rewards.