Literature DB >> 12150166

Self-stimulating rats combine subjective reward magnitude and subjective reward rate multiplicatively.

M I Leon1, C R Gallistel.   

Abstract

For rats that bar pressed for intracranial electrical stimulation in a 2-lever matching paradigm with concurrent variable interval schedules of reward, the authors found that the time allocation ratio is based on a multiplicative combination of the ratio of subjective reward magnitudes and the ratio of the rates of reward. Multiplicative combining was observed in a range covering approximately 2 orders of magnitude in the ratio of the rates of reward from about 1:10 to 10:1) and an order of magnitude change in the size of rewards. After determining the relation between the pulse frequency of stimulation and subjective reward magnitude, the authors were able to predict from knowledge of the subjective magnitudes of the rewards and the obtained relative rates of reward the subject's time allocation ratio over a range in which it varied by more than 3 orders of magnitude.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 12150166     DOI: 10.1037//0097-7403.24.3.265

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process        ISSN: 0097-7403


  14 in total

1.  Core multiplication in childhood.

Authors:  Koleen McCrink; Elizabeth S Spelke
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2010-05-26

2.  Biography of Charles R. Gallistel.

Authors:  Erik Stemmy
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-08-30       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Reward Size Informs Repeat-Switch Decisions and Strongly Modulates the Activity of Neurons in Parietal Cortex.

Authors:  Jan Kubanek; Lawrence H Snyder
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2017-01-01       Impact factor: 5.357

4.  Independence of terminal-link entry rate and immediacy in concurrent chains.

Authors:  Mark E Berg; Randolph C Grace
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Does sensitivity to magnitude depend on the temporal distribution of reinforcement?

Authors:  Randolph C Grace; Orn Bragason
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Rapid acquisition of preference in concurrent chains when alternatives differ on multiple dimensions of reinforcement.

Authors:  Elizabeth G E Kyonka; Randolph C Grace
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Is matching innate?

Authors:  C R Gallistel; Adam Philip King; Daniel Gottlieb; Fuat Balci; Efstathios B Papachristos; Matthew Szalecki; Kimberly S Carbone
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Relative reinforcer rates and magnitudes do not control concurrent choice independently.

Authors:  Douglas Elliffe; Michael Davison; Jason Landon
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  The Modulation of Operant Variation by the Probability, Magnitude, and Delay of Reinforcement.

Authors:  W David Stahlman; Aaron P Blaisdell
Journal:  Learn Motiv       Date:  2011-08-01

10.  Non-symbolic halving in an Amazonian indigene group.

Authors:  Koleen McCrink; Elizabeth S Spelke; Stanislas Dehaene; Pierre Pica
Journal:  Dev Sci       Date:  2013-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.