Literature DB >> 16812346

Choice for aperiodic versus periodic ratio schedules: A comparison of concurrent and concurrent-chain procedures.

D P Rider.   

Abstract

Choice between mixed-ratio schedules, consisting of equiprobable ratios of 1 and 99 responses per reinforcement, and fixed-ratio schedules of food reinforcement was assessed by two commonly used procedures: concurrent schedules and concurrent-chains schedules. Rats were trained under concurrent fixed-ratio mixed-ratio schedules, in which both ratio schedules were simultaneously available, and under a concurrent-chains schedule, in which access to one of the mutually exclusive ratio schedules comprising the terminal links was contingent on a single "choice" response. The distribution of responses between the two ratio schedules was taken as the choice proportion under the concurrent procedure, and the distribution of "choice" responses was taken as the choice proportion under the concurrent-chains procedure. Seven of eight rats displayed systematic choice; of those, each displayed nearly exclusive choice for fixed-ratio 35 to the mixed-ratio schedule under the concurrent procedure, but each displayed nearly exclusive choice for the mixed-ratio schedule to fixed-ratio 35 under the concurrent-chains procedure. Thus, preference for a fixed or a mixed schedule of reinforcement depended on the procedure used to assess preference.

Entities:  

Year:  1983        PMID: 16812346      PMCID: PMC1347933          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1983.40-225

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


  27 in total

1.  Performance on variable-interval schedules arranged singly and concurrently.

Authors:  M C Davison; I W Hunter
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1976-05       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Maximizing and matching on concurrent ratio schedules.

Authors:  R J Herrnstein; D H Loveland
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1975-07       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  On the law of effect.

Authors:  R J Herrnstein
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1970-03       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Preference for mixed versus constant delay of reinforcement.

Authors:  R A Cicerone
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1976-03       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Undermatching: a reappraisal of performance on concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement.

Authors:  D L Myers; L E Myers
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1977-01       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Response rate and changeover performance on concurrent variable-interval schedules.

Authors:  I W Hunter; M C Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1978-05       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Choice for periodic schedules of reinforcement.

Authors:  B Duncan; E Fantino
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1970-07       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Performance in concurrent interval schedules: a systematic replication.

Authors:  B Lobb; M C Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Preference for mixed-interval versus fixed-interval schedules.

Authors:  M C Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-03       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Matching under concurrent fixed-ratio variable-interval schedules of food presentation.

Authors:  A V Bacotti
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1977-01       Impact factor: 2.468

View more
  5 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.  Choice and transformed interreinforcement intervals.

Authors:  J Moore
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Choice between sequences of fixed-ratio schedules: effects of ratio values and probability of food delivery.

Authors:  A Poling; E Blakely; V Pellettiere; M Picker
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  The role of context in risky choice.

Authors:  Stephen F Meyer; Dan R Schley; Edmund Fantino
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 1.777

5.  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

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.