Edmund Fantino

Bio: Edmund Fantino is an academic researcher from University of California, San Diego. The author has contributed to research in topics: Reinforcement & Delay reduction hypothesis. The author has an hindex of 48, co-authored 165 publications receiving 7055 citations. Previous affiliations of Edmund Fantino include Yale University & University of California, Los Angeles.

Choice and rate of reinforcement.

Abstract: Pigeons' responses in the presence of two concurrently available (initial-link) stimuli produced one of two different (terminal-link) stimuli. The rate of reinforcement in the presence of one terminal-link stimulus was three times that of the other. Three different pairs of identical but independent variable-interval schedules controlled entry into the terminal links. When the intermediate pair was in effect, the pigeons distributed their (choice) responses in the presence of the concurrently available stimuli of the initial links in the same proportion as reinforcements were distributed in the mutually exclusive terminal links. This finding was consistent with those of earlier studies. When either the pair of larger or smaller variable-interval schedules was in effect, however, proportions of choice responses did not match proportions of reinforcements. In addition, matching was not obtained when entry into the terminal links was controlled by unequal variable-interval schedules. A formulation consistent with extant data states that choice behavior is dependent upon the amount of reduction in the expected time to primary reinforcement, as signified by entry into one terminal link, relative to the amount of reduction in expected time to reinforcement signified by entry into the other terminal link.

Choice optimal foraging, and the delay-reduction hypothesis

Abstract: Behaving organisms are continually choosing. Recently the theoretical and empirical study of decision making by behavioral ecologists and experimental psychologists have converged in the area of foraging, particularly food acquisition. This convergence has raised the interdisciplinary question of whether principles that have emerged from the study of decision making in the operant conditioning laboratory are consistent with decision making in naturally occurring foraging. One such principle, the “parameter-free delay-reduction hypothesis, ” developed in studies of choice in the operant conditioning laboratory, states that the effectiveness of a stimulus as a reinforcer may be predicted most accurately by calculating the decrease in time to food presentation correlated with the onset of the stimulus, relative to the length of time to food presentation measured from the onset of the preceding stimulus. Since foraging involves choice, the delay-reduction hypothesis may be extended to predict aspects of foraging. We discuss the strategy of assessing parameters of foraging with operant laboratory analogues to foraging. We then compare the predictions of the delay-reduction hypothesis with those of optimal foraging theory, developed by behavioral ecologists, showing that, with two exceptions, the two positions make comparable predictions. The delay-reduction hypothesis is also compared to several contemporary pscyhological accounts of choice. Results from several of our experiments with pigeons, designed as operant conditioning simulations of foraging, have shown the following: The more time subjects spend searching for or traveling between potential food sources, the less selective they become, that is, the more likely they are to accept the less preferred outcome; increasing time spent procuring (“handling”) food increases selectivity; how often the preferred outcome is available has a greater effect on choice then how often the less preferred outcome is available; subjects maximize reinforcement whether it is the rate, amount, or probability of reinforcement that is varied; there are no significant differences between subjects performing under different types of deprivation (open vs. closed economies). These results are all consistent with the delay-reduction hypothesis. Moreover, they suggest that the technology of the operant conditioning laboratory may have fruitful application in the study of foraging, and, in doing so, they underscore the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to behavior.

A model for choice in simple concurrent and concurrent-chains schedules.

Abstract: Pigeons' responses in the presence of two concurrently available (initial-link) stimuli produced one of two different (terminal-link) stimuli. Entrance into the mutually exclusive terminal links was arranged by different and independent variable-interval schedules for each key, while responses during the mutually exclusive terminal-link stimuli produced a single food reinforcement according to indentical and independent variable-interval schedules. The pigeons emitted more initial-link responses on the key with the shorter average interreinforcement interval in the initial link. This difference in initial-link response rates varied directly with the difference between the average inter-reinforcement intervals of the initial-link schedules and decreased when the initial-link schedule with the longer average interreinforcement interval was followed by several consecutive food reinforcements on the variable-interval schedule in the terminal link on that key. These results are incompatible with previous formulations of choice behavior with the concurrent-chains procedure. A modified formulation with a multiplier for the overall rate of primary reinforcement obtained on each key provides a better description of choice. In addition, the new formulation applies to behavior in simple (concurrent) choice situations, an advantage not achieved by previous formulations.

Human biochemical genetics

Abstract: So far in this course we have dealt entirely with the evolution of characters that are controlled by simple Mendelian inheritance at a single locus. There are notes on the course website about gametic disequilibrium and how allele frequencies change at two loci simultaneously, but we didn’t discuss them. In every example we’ve considered we’ve imagined that we could understand something about evolution by examining the evolution of a single gene. That’s the domain of classical population genetics. For the next few weeks we’re going to be exploring a field that’s actually older than classical population genetics, although the approach we’ll be taking to it involves the use of population genetic machinery. If you know a little about the history of evolutionary biology, you may know that after the rediscovery of Mendel’s work in 1900 there was a heated debate between the “biometricians” (e.g., Galton and Pearson) and the “Mendelians” (e.g., de Vries, Correns, Bateson, and Morgan). Biometricians asserted that the really important variation in evolution didn’t follow Mendelian rules. Height, weight, skin color, and similar traits seemed to

Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?

Abstract: Much research in the last two decades has demon- strated that human responses deviate from the performance deemed normative according to various models of decision mak- ing and rational judgment (e.g., the basic axioms of utility theory). This gap between the normative and the descriptive can be inter- preted as indicating systematic irrationalities in human cognition. However, four alternative interpretations preserve the assumption that human behavior and cognition is largely rational. These posit that the gap is due to (1) performance errors, (2) computational limitations, (3) the wrong norm being applied by the experi- menter, and (4) a different construal of the task by the subject. In the debates about the viability of these alternative explanations, attention has been focused too narrowly on the modal response. In a series of experiments involving most of the classic tasks in the heuristics and biases literature, we have examined the implica- tions of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap. Performance er- rors are a minor factor in the gap; computational limitations un- derlie non-normative responding on several tasks, particularly those that involve some type of cognitive decontextualization. Un- expected patterns of covariance can suggest when the wrong norm is being applied to a task or when an alternative construal of the task should be considered appropriate.

Citation classic - optimal foraging - a selective review of theory and tests

Abstract: Beginning with Emlen (1966) and MacArthur and Pianka (1966) and extending through the last ten years, several authors have sought to predict the foraging behavior of animals by means of mathematical models. These models are very similar,in that they all assume that the fitness of a foraging animal is a function of the efficiency of foraging measured in terms of some "currency" (Schoener, 1971) -usually energy- and that natural selection has resulted in animals that forage so as to maximize this fitness. As a result of these similarities, the models have become known as "optimal foraging models"; and the theory that embodies them, "optimal foraging theory." The situations to which optimal foraging theory has been applied, with the exception of a few recent studies, can be divided into the following four categories: (1) choice by an animal of which food types to eat (i.e., optimal diet); (2) choice of which patch type to feed in (i.e., optimal patch choice); (3) optimal allocation of time to different patches; and (4) optimal patterns and speed of movements. In this review we discuss each of these categories separately, dealing with both the theoretical developments and the data that permit tests of the predictions. The review is selective in the sense that we emphasize studies that either develop testable predictions or that attempt to test predictions in a precise quantitative manner. We also discuss what we see to be some of the future developments in the area of optimal foraging theory and how this theory can be related to other areas of biology. Our general conclusion is that the simple models so far formulated are supported are supported reasonably well by available data and that we are optimistic about the value both now and in the future of optimal foraging theory. We argue, however, that these simple models will requre much modification, espicially to deal with situations that either cannot easily be put into one or another of the above four categories or entail currencies more complicated that just energy.

Specious reward: a behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control.

Abstract: In a choice among assured, familiar outcomes of behavior, impulsiveness is the choice of less rewarding over more rewarding alternatives. Discussions of impulsiveness in the literature of economics, sociology, social psychology, dynamic psychology and psychiatry, behavioral psychology, and \"behavior therapy\" are reviewed. 'Impulsiveness seems to be best accounted for by the hyberbolic curves that have been found to describe the decline in effectiveness of rewards as the rewards are delayed from the time of choice. Such curves predict a reliable change of choice between some alternative rewards as a function of time. This change of choice provides a rationale for the known kinds of impulse control and relates them to several hitherto perplexing phenomena: behavioral rigidity, time-out from positive reinforcement, willpower, self-reward, compulsive traits, projection, boredom, and the capacity of punishing stimuli to attract attention.