Licking and bar-pressing were recorded as squirrel monkeys responded to human “sweetness” equivalents of 0.03, 0.1, 0.3 and 1.0 sucrose, fructose, glucose, lactose, and maltose. Both measures showed that as concentration of each sugar increased, rates of responding increased accordingly. With reference to sweetness quality changes, the two measures were not equivalent. Mean licking rates appeared to be insensitive to the kind of sugar being tested, thus reflecting neither human sweetness estimations nor amount of electrophysiological activity in the chorda tympani in the squirrel monkey. Rates of bar pressing approximated the general pattern of peripheral neural responding with one discrepancy that remains to be explained.
References
1.
CameronA. T.The taste sense and the relative sweetness of sugars and other sweet substances. New York: Sugar Research Foundation, Inc., 1947. (Sci. Rep. Ser. No. 9)
2.
CollierG.Some properties of saccharin, sucrose and milk as reinforcers. Paper read at the Psychonomic Society meetings, New York, 1961.
3.
CollierG.Consummatory and instrumental responding as functions of deprivation. J. exp. Psychol., 1962, 64, 410–414.
4.
CollierG.KnarrF. A.MarxM. H.Some relations between the intensive properties of the consummatory response and reinforcement. J. exp. Psychol., 1961, 62, 484–495.
5.
CollierG.MyersL.The loci of reinforcement. J. exp. Psychol., 1961, 61, 57–66.
6.
CollierG.SiskelM.Jr.Performance as a joint function of amount of reinforcement and inter-reinforcement interval. J. exp. Psychol., 1959, 57, 115–120.
7.
GuttmanN.Operant conditioning, extinction and periodic reinforcement in relation to concentration of sucrose used as reinforcing agent. J. exp. Psychol., 1953, 46, 213–224.
8.
GuttmanN.Equal-reinforcement values for sucrose and glucose solutions compared with equal-sweetness values. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1954, 47, 358–361.
9.
HagstromE. C.PfaffmannC.The relative taste effectiveness of different sugars for the rat. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1959, 52, 259–262.
10.
HulseS. H.BaconW. E.Supplementary report: partial reinforcement and amount of reinforcement as determinants of instrumental licking rates. J. exp. Psychol., 1962, 63, 214–215.
11.
HulseS. H.SnyderH. L.BaconW. E.Instrumental licking behavior as a function of schedule, volume, and concentration of a saccharine reinforcer. J. exp. Psychol., 1960, 60, 359–364.
12.
JayJ. R.Reinforcing effects of five sugars in different concentrations on rates of bar-pressing and licking in the squirrel monkey (saimiri sciurea). Unpublished Master's thesis, Brown Univer., 1965.
13.
MillerN.Analytical studies of drive and reversal. Amer. Psychologist, 1961, 16, 739–754.
14.
PfaffmannC.Taste stimulation and preference behavior. Presented at the First International Symposium on Olfaction and Taste, Wenner-Gren Center, Stockholm, September 2–5, 1962.
PfaffmannC. P.FisherG. L.FrankM. K.The sensory and behavioral factors in taste preferences. In HayashiT. (Ed.), Olfaction and taste. Vol. II. New York: Pergamon, 1967. Pp. 361–381.
17.
SchrierA. M.Sucrose concentration and response rates of monkeys. Psychol. Rep., 1963, 12, 666.
18.
SnellT.Reinforcement with sugars. Unpublished Master's thesis, Brown Univer., 1965.
19.
SnyderH. L.HulseS. H.Effect of volume of reinforcement and number of consummatory responses on licking and running behavior. J. exp. Psychol., 1961, 61, 474–479.
20.
WeissmanA.Licking behavior of rats on a schedule of food reinforcement. Science, 1962, 135, 99–101.
21.
YoungP. T.TraftonC. L.Activity contour maps as related to preference in four gustatory stimulus areas of the rat. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1964, 57, 68–75.
