scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Choice, rate of reinforcement, and the changeover delay

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
The present study shows that equality between proportions of responses and proportions of reinforcements ("matching") is obtained when the value of the changeover delay is varied.
Abstract
Pigeons distribute their responses on concurrently available variable-interval schedules in the same proportion as reinforcements are distributed on the two schedules only when a changeover delay is used. The present study shows that this equality between proportions of responses and proportions of reinforcements (“matching”) is obtained when the value of the changeover delay is varied. When responses are partitioned into the set of rapid response bursts occurring during the delay interval and the set of responses occurring subsequently, the proportion of neither set of responses matches the proportion of reinforcements. Instead, each set deviates from matching but in opposite directions. Matching on the gross level results from the interaction of two patterns evident in the local response rates: (I) the lengthening of the changeover delay response burst is accompanied by a commensurate decrease in the number of changeovers; (2) the changeover delay response burst is longer than the scheduled delay duration. When delay responses are eliminated by introducing a blackout during the delay interval, response matching is eliminated; the pigeon, however, continues to match the proportion of time spent responding on a key to the proportion of reinforcements obtained on that key.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Choice between response units: The rate constancy model.

TL;DR: The present experiments provided food for key pecking on both a random-interval and a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) schedule and a model stating that time allocation to each component matches the relative frequency of reinforcement for that component appeared preferable to the absolute-rate version of the matching law.
Journal ArticleDOI

Methodological improvements to a Procedure for Rapidly Establishing Steady‐State Behavior

TL;DR: This paper performed three experiments to improve the quality and retention of data obtained from a Procedure for Rapidly Establishing Steady-State Behavior (PRESS-B) dataset, and found that the 0.5-s condition group exhibited the fewest instances of exclusive reinforcer acquisition.
Journal ArticleDOI

Behavioral ephemera, difficult discriminations, and behavioral stability.

TL;DR: In a concurrent-chains procedure, the terminal links were identical variable-interval schedules, but in one terminal link every response produced a timeout as discussed by the authors, and the relation vanished with training, in keeping with the equality of food rate across the 2 terminal links.
Journal ArticleDOI

Choice in Transition, Changeover Response Requirements, and Local Preference

TL;DR: This article found that rats responded for food on concurrent random interval schedules arranging seven unsignaled food-rate ratios within sessions, and that preference became more extreme toward the just-productive lever following continuations of food deliveries.
Journal ArticleDOI

Preference for a Forced-Choice Fixed-Ratio Schedule over an Equivalent Free-Choice Response Chain in the Pigeon

TL;DR: The number of chain link keys appeared to be more influential than either overall response requirements or the time required to complete each option, and response stereotypy emerged during the chain trials.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement

TL;DR: The present experiment is a study of strength of response of pigeons on a concurrent schedule under which they peck at either of two response-keys and investigates output as a function of frequency of reinforcement.
Journal ArticleDOI

Concurrent performances: reinforcement interaction and response independence.

TL;DR: When a pigeon's pecks on two keys were reinforced concurrently by two independent variable-interval (VI) schedules, one for each key, the response rate on either key was given by the equation: R(1)=R(1)/(r(1)+r(2))(5/6), where R is response rate, r is reinforcement rate, and the subscripts 1 and 2 indicate keys 1 and 1.
Journal ArticleDOI

Changeover delay and concurrent schedules: some effects on relative performance measures

TL;DR: The pigeon and the rat partition total response output between both schedules of a concurrent variable-interval pair is studied and the quantitative nature of a partition seems critically dependent on the relative rates with which the two schedules provide reinforcements for responding, in addition to the changeover delay.
Related Papers (5)