Literature DB >> 16811736

Preference for and effects of variable-as opposed to fixed-reinforcer duration.

S M Essock, E P Reese.   

Abstract

Pigeons were trained on multiple schedules in which a fixed number of pecks produced either a fixed or a variable period of access to food, the average variable-duration reinforcement equalling the fixed. Pecking rates were generally higher during the variable-duration component. Subsequent performance on concurrent schedules revealed an initial preference for variable-duration reinforcement for all subjects; for most subjects, this preference was sustained. For one subject, the average variable duration was gradually reduced to half the fixed duration: continued preference for the variable component resulted in a loss of up to 30% of available reinforcement time. A return to multiple schedules with unequal pay-off shifted the preference to the greater fixed duration, and this preference was maintained even when the variable duration was again raised to equal the fixed duration. For the remaining subjects, the initial variable-duration preference on concurrent schedules was gradually replaced by a side preference. When the range of variable durations was varied, keeping the average variable duration equal to the fixed, the occasional longer reinforcers sustained a preference for variable-reinforcer durations for three of the four subjects.

Year:  1974        PMID: 16811736      PMCID: PMC1333172          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-89

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


  8 in total

1.  APERIODICITY AS A FACTOR IN CHOICE.

Authors:  R J HERRNSTEIN
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1964-03       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Effect of reinforcement duration on fixed-interval responding.

Authors:  J E Staddon
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1970-01       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Preference for mixed-interval versus fixed-interval schedules: number of component intervals.

Authors:  M C Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-03       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Preference for mixed- versus fixed-ratio schedules.

Authors:  E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1967-01       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Successive interresponse times in fixed-ratio and second-order fixed-ratio performance.

Authors:  M C Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-05       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Chance stimulus sequences for discrimination tasks.

Authors:  B J Fellows
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1967-02       Impact factor: 17.737

7.  On the measurement of reinforcement frequency in the study of preference.

Authors:  P Killeen
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1968-05       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Conditioning history and maladaptive human operant behavior.

Authors:  H Weiner
Journal:  Psychol Rep       Date:  1965-12
  8 in total
  10 in total

1.  The effect of rate of reinforcement and time in session on preference for variability.

Authors:  Frances K McSweeney; Benjamin P Kowal; Eric S Murphy
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 1.986

2.  Incentive theory: IV. Magnitude of reward.

Authors:  P R Killeen
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Concurrent variable-interval schedule performance: Fixed versus mixed reinforcer durations.

Authors:  M Davison; I Hogsden
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 2.468

Review 4.  Toward an animal model of gambling: delay discounting and the allure of unpredictable outcomes.

Authors:  Gregory J Madden; Eric E Ewan; Carla H Lagorio
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2006-12-15

5.  Risky choice in pigeons: preference for amount variability using a token-reinforcement system.

Authors:  Carla H Lagorio; Timothy D Hackenberg
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Resistance to change and preference for variable versus fixed response sequences.

Authors:  Joana Arantes; Mark E Berg; Dien Le; Randolph C Grace
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Oral self-administration of pentobarbital by rhesus monkeys: relative reinforcing effects under concurrent fixed-ratio schedules.

Authors:  R A Meisch; G A Lemaire
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Probability and delay of reinforcement as factors in discrete-trial choice.

Authors:  J E Mazur
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Choice between variable and fixed cocaine injections in male rhesus monkeys.

Authors:  S L Huskinson; K B Freeman; N M Petry; J K Rowlett
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2017-06-10       Impact factor: 4.530

10.  Pigeons' preference for variable-interval water reinforcement under widely varied water budgets.

Authors:  D A Case; P Nichols; E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 2.468

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.