Literature DB >> 16812160

Uncertainty reduction, conditioned reinforcement, and observing.

E Fantino, J Moore.   

Abstract

In a concurrent-chains procedure, pigeons chose between equivalent mixed and multiple fixed-interval schedules of reinforcement. In the first experiment, preference for the multiple schedule was higher when the probability of the shorter fixed interval was less than .50 than for complementary points, an outcome consistent with the delay-reduction hypothesis of conditioned reinforcement and observing, but inconsistent with the uncertainty-reduction hypothesis which requires symmetrical preferences with a maximum when the two intervals are equiprobable. A second experiment assessed preference for equivalent mixed and multiple schedules when each choice outcome resulted in two reinforcements, one on the longer and one on the shorter fixed interval. The order of the two fixed intervals was determined probabilistically. Pigeons again preferred multiple to mixed schedules, although multiple-schedule preference did not vary systematically with the likelihood of the shorter fixed interval occurring first. The results from these choice procedures are consistent with those from the observing-response literature in suggesting that the strength of a stimulus cannot be well described as a function of the degree of uncertainty reduction the stimulus provides about reinforcement.

Year:  1980        PMID: 16812160      PMCID: PMC1332908          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-3

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


  14 in total

1.  Uncertainty and conflict: a point of contact between information-theory and behavior-theory concepts.

Authors:  D E BERLYNE
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1957-11       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  The role of observing responses in discrimination learning.

Authors:  L B WYCKOFF
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1952-11       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  A test of the negative discriminative stimulus as a reinforcer of observing.

Authors:  J A Dinsmoor; M P Browne; C E Lawrence
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-07       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Concurrent responding with fixed relative rate of reinforcement.

Authors:  D A Stubbs; S S Pliskoff
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-11       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  An appraisal of preference for multiple versus mixed schedules.

Authors:  S R Hursh; E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-07       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Punishment of observing by the negative discriminative stimulus.

Authors:  D E Mulvaney; J A Dinsmoor; A R Jwaideh; L H Hughes
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  The effects of terminal-link fixed-interval and variable-interval schedules on responding under concurrent chained schedules.

Authors:  D Macewen
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-09       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Observing stimulus sources that signal food or no food.

Authors:  H M Jenkins; R A Boakes
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-09       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Effects of stimulus duration on observing behavior maintained by differential reinforcement magnitude.

Authors:  R J Auge
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-11       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Value of knowing when reinforcement is due.

Authors:  G Bower; J McLean; J Meacham
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1966-10
View more
  5 in total

1.  Sample-duration effects on pigeons' delayed matching as a function of predictability of duration.

Authors:  P J Urcuioli; T B DeMarse; K M Lionello
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Incentive theory: II. Models for choice.

Authors:  P R Killeen
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1982-09       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Preference for multiple versus mixed schedules of reinforcement.

Authors:  B Alsop; M Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Choice and multiple reinforcers.

Authors:  J Moore
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Choice with uncertain outcomes: conditioned reinforcement effects.

Authors:  R Dunn; M L Spetch
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 2.468

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.