Literature DB >> 16812364

Frequency versus magnitude of reinforcement: New data with a different procedure.

J C Todorov, E S Hanna, M C Bittencourt De Sá.   

Abstract

Two pigeons, with previous exposure to concurrent schedules, were submitted to 29 sessions of 8 hours each with concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules in which reinforcement parameters changed from session to session. In the first nine sessions reinforcement durations were equal in both schedules while reinforcement frequencies varied; in Sessions 10 through 18, both frequency and duration of reinforcement were varied; in Sessions 19 through 29, only reinforcement duration was varied. Results with this different procedure confirm previous findings that behavior is more sensitive to changes in reinforcement frequency than to reinforcement magnitude.

Year:  1984        PMID: 16812364      PMCID: PMC1348029          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-157

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


  14 in total

1.  Concurrent performances: a baseline for the study of reinforcement magnitude.

Authors:  A C CATANIA
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1963-04       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  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

3.  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

4.  Interaction of frequency and magnitude of reinforcement on concurrent performances.

Authors:  J C Todorov
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-05       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  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

6.  Reinforcer effectiveness as a function of reinforcer rate and magnitude: a comparison of concurrent performances.

Authors:  J W Schneider
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-11       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Choice behavior and the accessibility of the reinforcer.

Authors:  E Fantino; N Squires; N Delbrück; C Peterson
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-07       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Choice, experience, and the generalized matching law.

Authors:  J C Todorov; J M de Oliveira Castro; E S Hanna; M C Bittencourt de Sa; M Q Barreto
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice.

Authors:  W M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Matching since Baum (1979).

Authors:  J H Wearden; I S Burgess
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1982-11       Impact factor: 2.468

View more
  12 in total

1.  Sensitivity to relative reinforcer rate in concurrent schedules: independence from relative and absolute reinforcer duration.

Authors:  A P McLean; N M Blampied
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Concurrent schedules: reinforcer magnitude effects.

Authors:  Jason Landon; Michael Davison; Douglas Elliffe
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Disrupted stimulus control but not reward sensitivity in individuals with autism spectrum disorders: a matching law analysis.

Authors:  Phil Reed; Rose Hawthorn; Sam Bolger; Katie Meredith; Ruth Bishop
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2012-11

4.  Shock intensity and signaled avoidance responding.

Authors:  D Das Graças De Souza; A B Alves De Moraes; J C Todorov
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  The generalized matching law as a description of multiple-schedule responding.

Authors:  F K McSweeney; V A Farmer; J D Dougan; J E Whipple
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Sensitivity to reinforcer duration in a self-control procedure.

Authors:  K G White; M E Pipe
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Stimulus effects on concurrent performance in transition.

Authors:  E S Hanna; D E Blackman; J C Todorov
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  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

9.  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

10.  Quantification of drug choice with the generalized matching law in rhesus monkeys.

Authors:  Mikhail N Koffarnus; James H Woods
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 2.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.