Hiroto Okouchi

This analogue study examined the effectiveness of a social-standard setting on self-instructional control for cold-pressor pain. Twelve male undergraduates were served as participants. Self-instructions were effective on the increase in the tolerance time to iced water compared to baseline. When participants thought experimenter knew their instructions, the tolerance time to iced water was longer than that when participants thought no one knew their instructions. Any self-instructional control was not observed on subjective measures (pain perception and unpleasantness). These results suggest that the effect of social-standard setting on self-instructional control for pain was partially replicated. Some future research directions were discussed.

The relation between reformative self-control and discounting of reward value by delay or effort was examined. Thirty-two Japanese undergraduates were selected based on their scores on a standardized pencil and paper test of self-control, the Redressive-Reformative Self-Control Scale (Sugiwaka, 1995). The subjects indicated their preference (i) between a hypothetical 100 000 yen reward available with various delays and a certain reward of variable amount available immediately; or (ii) between a hypothetical 100 000 yen reward available with various efforts and a certain reward of variable amount available without effort. The discounting of delayed reward value was described well by a hyperbolic function proposed by Mazur (1987). The slopes of the delayed discounting curves were steeper for subjects who scored low on the Reformative Self-Control Scale, which is a measure of reformative self-control and a subscale of the Redressive-Reformative Self-Control Scale. The discounting by effort was also described well by the hyperbolic function, The slopes of the effortful discounting curves did not correlate to those of the delayed discounting curves. The slopes were not systematically different across the groups of subjects with different scores on the reformative self-control scale.

Study objectives: The purpose of the present study was to analyze everyday behavior, specifically, whether the interval between train arrivals would influence passengers' behavior of arriving at the platform. Design: The pattern of the number of people arriving at a platform during the interval between trains was compared at 3 stations where the intervals between train arrivals differed. Settings: The study was conducted at 3 stations in the Kansai district (western Japan) at which only local train stopped. Participants: All passengers boarding trains on the selected platforms during the observation period were participants. Independent variable: The number of trains arriving at a station per hour (2, 6, or 12) was the Independent variable. Results: The longer the interval between trains, the more people tended to arrive at the platform just before the train came. Conclusion: The present results suggest that the arrival of trains functions like a reinforcer, so that the interval between trains functions like a reinforcement schedule.

A report to have responded slowly was reinforced after a fixed-ratio schedule, whereas a report to have responded rapidly was reinforced after a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule. All 5 undergraduates reported they had responded slowly when the last interresponse time during the preceding schedule had been short, and had responded rapidly when the last interresponse time had been long. This referent-report relation was not observed when every report was reinforced nondifferentially. The results demonstrate that the self-reports were affected by the differential reinforcement when schedule performances were their referent.

Undergraduates responded under a variable-ratio 30 schedule in the presence of a 25-mm long line and on a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 6-s schedule when a 13-mm long line was present. Following this, a line-length continuum generalization test was administered under a fixed-interval 6-s schedule (Experiment 1) or extinction (Experiment 2). In both experiments, obtained generalization gradients conformed to typical postdiscrimination gradients. Responses were frequent under stimuli physically similar to the 25-mm line and infrequent under stimuli physically similar to the 13-mm line. The generalization gradients were generally asymmetric with peak response rates occurring at line lengths greater than 25 mm.

The present article reviews studies on the experimental analysis of rule-governed behavior. The main results are as follows: (1) Although instructions are effective in establishing an efficient occurrence of responses, sensitivity to changes in the contingencies is reduced when instructions are used. (2) Contingencies that contact the instructions eliminate instruction-following responses. (3) A history of correspondence between instruc tions and reinforcement schedules promotes instruction-following responses. (4) Without certain programmed contingencies, self-rules correlate with nonverbal responses. (5) Nonverbal responses generally covariate with self-rules. When reinforcement schedules for nonverbal responses are strong and contradict the contingencies for verbal responses, however, the nonverbal responses do not co-vary with the self-rules. (6) When a chain of a self-rule and a nonverbal response was reinforced, the self-rule and nonverbal responses were correlated. Some future directions for research on rule-governed behavior were discussed from the viewpoint of social contingencies.

Undergraduates were exposed to a mixed fixed-ratio differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule. Values of the schedule components were adjusted so that interreinforcer intervals in one component were longer than those in another component. Following this, a mixed fixed-interval 5-s fixed-interval 20-s schedule (Experiment 1) or six fixed-interval schedules in which the values ranged from 5 to. 40 s (Experiment 2) were in effect. In both experiments, response rates under the fixed-interval schedules were higher when the interreinforcer intervals approximated those produced under the fixed-ratio schedule, whereas the rates were lower when the interreinforcer intervals approximated those produced under the different-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule. The present results demonstrate that the effects of behavioral history were under control of the interreinforcer intervals as discriminative stimuli.

Six undergraduates were exposed to a fixed-ratio schedule with an instruction to respond slowly and to a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule with an instruction to respond rapidly when a white circle was presented on a display monitor. When a yellow circle was presented, however, the subjects were exposed to the fixed-ratio schedule with the instruction to respond rapidly and to the differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule with the instruction to respond slowly. Following this, a fixed-interval schedule was in effect during those stimuli and instructions. Under the white circle, response rates were higher with the instruction to respond slowly than with the instruction to respond rapidly during the fixed-interval schedule. Such control by instructions was not observed under the yellow circle. A previous study examined establishment of novel instructional control by between-subject comparisons and found that for three of four subjects (Okouchi, 1999). In contrast, the present results demonstrate the instructional control through within-subject comparisons for all six subjects.

Study objective: The purpose of this study was to establish self-instructional control by differential reinforcement of novel chains of self-instruction and nonverbal behavior. Design: 3 conditions were compared: a verbal-nonverbal noncorrespondence history condition, a verbal-nonverbal correspondence history condition, and a no-history condition. Setting: An experimental room. Participants: Undergraduates (8 males, 15 females; 18-27 years old) with no prior experience with experiments on reinforcement schedules. Procedure: 5 participants in Experiment 1, and 4 in Experiment 2, all of whom were in the verbal-nonverbal noncorrespondence history condition, were exposed to an FR schedule when they had chosen an instruction to respond slowly, and a DRL schedule when they had chosen an instruction to respond rapidly. Following this, an FI schedule was in effect regardless of the instruction chosen. Results: For these 9 participants, response rates during the FI schedule were higher when the instruction to respond slowly had been chosen than when the instruction to respond rapidly had been chosen. Such control by self-instruction was not observed for participants who did not have a history of differential reinforcement of verbal-nonverbal noncorrespondence in this setting. Conclusion: The results suggest that self-instructional control can be classified as a response chain.

Thirty-two undergraduates were exposed to a fixed-interval 60-s schedule. There were extreme individual differences in postreinforcement pauses and response rates. Such individual differences persisted for 60 sessions with a total of 1200 reinforcers. The total number of errors made on the Matching Familiar Figures Test was negatively correlated with the postreinforcement pause and positively correlated with the response rate. These results demonstrate that individual differences in human fixed-interval performance are robust and reliable, and relate to impulsiveness.

Four undergraduates were exposed to a fixed-ratio schedule under an instruction to respond slowly and to a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate 5-s schedule under an instruction to respond rapidly. Following this, a fixed-interval schedule was in effect under those same two sets of instructions. For 3 of 4 subjects, response rates were higher with the instruction to respond slowly than with the instruction to respond rapidly during the fixed-interval schedule. For the remaining subject, low rate responding with the instruction to respond rapidly continued during the first 17 reinforcements of the fixed-interval schedule. Such control by instructions was not observed for other subjects exposed only to a fixed-interval schedule, with or without instructions. The results demonstrate that the effect of instructions can be altered by contingencies and suggest that instructions can function as discriminative stimuli.

Seventeen undergraduates were randomly assigned to one of four groups and were exposed first to a multiple fixed-ratio / differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (mult FR DRL) schedule, then to a multiple fixed-interval / fixed-interval (mult FI FI) schedule. Subjects in the Minimal Instruction condition received no instructions regarding rates of responding. Subjects in the Accurate Instruction condition were instructed to respond rapidly and slowly under the FR and DRL components respectively. under the mult FI FI schedule, a constant reinforcer magnitude was delivered for the Standard FI subjects, whereas reinforcer magnitude varied with number of responses during the interval for the Modified FI subjects. For 3 of 4 subjects in the Minimum Instructions / Standard FI group, higher rates of FI responding occurred under the stimulus previously correlated with FR than that previously correlated with DRL. As a whole, stimulus control by the history effect was stronger for subjects in the Accurate Instruction condition than for those in the Minimum Instruction condition. The effects of instructions were not influenced by the correlation of reinforcer magnitude with response number.

The effects of feedback on the control of peripheral skin temperature were examined using a tension-relaxation experiment. Sixteen male undergraduates were assigned to feedback or no-feedback groups and asked to increase the temperature of the right index finger immediately after decreasing with (in the feedback group) or without (in the no-feedback group) feedback during 10 training sessions. A no-feedback transfer session (post-test) followed these sessions. During the training sessions, skin temperature corresponded to instructions in the feedback group, whereas it did not in the no-feedback group. Feedback control did not transfer to the no-feedback condition. These results were discussed in terms of the ceiling-effect hypothesis in the baseline-relaxation type experiment and of the subjects' cognitive events, including strategies.

Effects of training tasks and feedback on the control of peripheral skin temperature were examined. Eight male undergraduate students participated in 12 training sessions under 3 conditions : maximum amount task (MAT), maximum frequency task (MFT), and no feedback (NFB) conditions. Subjects were asked to increase temperature of right index finger as large as possible and were presented amount related feedback and monetary reward under the MAT condition, while they were asked to increase it as long as possible and were presented time (frequency) related feedback and monetary reward on the MFT condition. Under the NFB condition, the procedure was almost the same as that under the MAT condition except feedback stimulus was not presented. Skin temperature of 5 subjects increased after 5 trainihg sessions. There was not any clear differences of skin temperature change between 2 training tasks. Feedback had interference effects on performances of skin temperature control. That is, in all subjects except 1,performances under the MAT and MFT conditions were inferior to that under the NFB condition during the last 7 sessions. Performances were related with verbally reported relaxation.