CHOICE FOR APERIODIC VERSUS PERIODIC RATIO SCHEDULES: A COMPARISON OF CONCURRENT AND CONCURRENT-CHAINS PROCEDURES

Choice between mixed‐ratio schedules, consisting of equiprobable ratios of 1 and 99 responses per reinforcement, and fixed‐ratio schedules of food reinforcement was assessed by two commonly used procedures: concurrent schedules and concurrent‐chains schedules. Rats were trained under concurrent fixed‐ratio mixed‐ratio schedules, in which both ratio schedules were simultaneously available, and under a concurrent‐chains schedule, in which access to one of the mutually exclusive ratio schedules comprising the terminal links was contingent on a single “choice” response. The distribution of responses between the two ratio schedules was taken as the choice proportion under the concurrent procedure, and the distribution of “choice” responses was taken as the choice proportion under the concurrent‐chains procedure. Seven of eight rats displayed systematic choice; of those, each displayed nearly exclusive choice for fixed‐ratio 35 to the mixed‐ratio schedule under the concurrent procedure, but each displayed nearly exclusive choice for the mixed‐ratio schedule to fixed‐ratio 35 under the concurrent‐chains procedure. Thus, preference for a fixed or a mixed schedule of reinforcement depended on the procedure used to assess preference.