Variable-ratio conditioning history produces high- and low-rate fixed-interval performance in rats.

Four rats were exposed to an A-B-A-B series of 30 sessions each of variable-ratio 20 (A) and fixed-interval 30-s (B) schedules. Four other rats received 120 sessions of fixed-interval 30 s. The rats with a history of variable-ratio responding subsequently showed primarily high or low response-rate patterns on the fixed-interval schedule without evidence of classical scalloping (i.e., increased rates of responding throughout the interreinforcement interval), except infrequently in 1 rat. The rats exposed to only the fixed-interval 30-s schedule displayed the expected sequence of scalloping giving way to lower rate break-run or simply low-rate responding over time. This experiment shows that when naive rats are exposed to even a simple history of reinforcement (in this case, a variable-ratio 20), their subsequent fixed-interval performance is very different from comparable performance in naive rats, and might be said to be more similar to the responding of adult humans. The argument is made that care should be taken in comparing the fixed-interval performance of humans and nonhumans because humans have a complex history of reinforcement, whereas laboratory nonhumans are typically naive.