Literature DB >> 16262185

Earning and obtaining reinforcers under concurrent interval scheduling.

James S MacDonall1.   

Abstract

Contingencies of reinforcement specify how reinforcers are earned and how they are obtained. Ratio contingencies specify the number of responses that earn a reinforcer, and the response satisfying the ratio requirement obtains the earned reinforcer. Simple interval schedules specify that a certain time earns a reinforcer, which is obtained by the first response after the interval. The earning of reinforcers has been overlooked, perhaps because simple schedules confound the rates of earning reinforcers with the rates of obtaining reinforcers. In concurrent variable-interval schedules, however, spending time at one alternative earns reinforcers not only at that alternative, but at the other alternative as well. Reinforcers earned for delivery at the other alternative are obtained after changing over. Thus the rates of earning reinforcers are not confounded with the rate of obtaining reinforcers, but the rates of earning reinforcers are the same at both alternatives, which masks their possibly differing effects on preference. Two experiments examined the separate effects of earning reinforcers and of obtaining reinforcers on preference by using concurrent interval schedules composed of two pairs of stay and switch schedules (MacDonall, 2000). In both experiments, the generalized matching law, which is based on rates of obtaining reinforcers, described responding only when rates of earning reinforcers were the same at each alternative. An equation that included both the ratio of the rates of obtaining reinforcers and the ratio of the rates of earning reinforcers described the results from all conditions from each experiment.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16262185      PMCID: PMC1243978          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2005.76-04

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  16 in total

1.  Synthesizing concurrent interval performances.

Authors:  J S MacDonall
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Reinforcing staying and switching while using a changeover delay.

Authors:  James S MacDonall
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  A progression for generating variable-interval schedules.

Authors:  M FLESHLER; H S HOFFMAN
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1962-10       Impact factor: 2.468

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

Authors:  R J HERRNSTEIN
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1961-07       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  On two types of deviation from the matching law: bias and undermatching.

Authors:  W M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-07       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Preference and Switching under Concurrent Scheduling.

Authors:  J D Findley
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1958-04       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Run length, visit duration, and reinforcers per visit in concurrent performance.

Authors:  J Macdonall
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  A local model of concurrent performance.

Authors:  J Macdonall
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Performance in concurrent interval schedules.

Authors:  A J Trevett; M C Davison; R J Williams
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-05       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Is there a decisive test between matching and maximizing?

Authors:  H Rachlin; L Green; B Tormey
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 2.468

View more
  6 in total

1.  The dynamics of the law of effect: a comparison of models.

Authors:  Michael A Navakatikyan; Michael Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  The stay/switch model of concurrent choice.

Authors:  James S MacDonall
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  The stay/switch model describes choice among magnitudes of reinforcers.

Authors:  James S MacDonall
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2008-03-21       Impact factor: 1.777

4.  An investigation of differential reinforcement of alternative behavior without extinction.

Authors:  Elizabeth S Athens; Timothy R Vollmer
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2010

5.  An alternative to the stay/switch equation assessed when using a changeover-delay.

Authors:  James S MacDonall
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 1.777

6.  Diverse and often opposite behavioural effects of NMDA receptor antagonists in rats: implications for "NMDA antagonist modelling" of schizophrenia.

Authors:  Gary Gilmour; Elsa Y Pioli; Sophie L Dix; Janice W Smith; Michael W Conway; Wendy T Jones; Sally Loomis; Rebecca Mason; Shahram Shahabi; Mark D Tricklebank
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 4.530

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.