Spatiotemporal patterns of behavior produced by variable-interval schedules of reinforcement.

Pear (1985) watched where pigeons stood while they pecked for food.

The birds worked on two VI schedules: one that paid every 15 seconds and one every 5 minutes.

After each schedule was steady, the food stopped to see if the old standing pattern would return.

Each VI schedule created its own map. Birds stood in one spot for VI 15-s and a different spot for VI 5-min.

When food ended, the birds first moved back to the old VI 5-min spot, then the pattern slowly faded.

Space, not just pecks, carries the schedule signature.

Silverman et al. (1994) and Lowe et al. (1995) asked the next question: do response rates also shift inside the session? They found rates climb or fall minute-by-minute as local reinforcement density changes.

Mace et al. (1990) moved the same VI 60-s versus VI 240-s comparison to adults with ID sorting dishes. Higher rate schedules kept workers on-task longer, showing the rule leaves the lab.

Lander et al. (1968) had earlier shown pigeons divide pecks between two VI keys in a power ratio. Pear (1985) adds the spatial layer: even with one key, the bird’s body still allocates space in a schedule-specific way.

You now have two windows to check schedule control: response count and where the learner stands or sits. If a child drifts to the corner, ask whether your VI schedule is pushing that spatial habit. Try a quick extinction probe: remove reinforcement for two minutes and watch the old spots reappear—evidence that history, not just current contingencies, still drives behavior.