Literature DB >> 16812632

Concurrent schedules: Effects of time- and response-allocation constraints.

M Davison.   

Abstract

Five pigeons were trained on concurrent variable-interval schedules arranged on two keys. In Part 1 of the experiment, the subjects responded under no constraints, and the ratios of reinforcers obtainable were varied over five levels. In Part 2, the conditions of the experiment were changed such that the time spent responding on the left key before a subsequent changeover to the right key determined the minimum time that must be spent responding on the right key before a changeover to the left key could occur. When the left key provided a higher reinforcer rate than the right key, this procedure ensured that the time allocated to the two keys was approximately equal. The data showed that such a time-allocation constraint only marginally constrained response allocation. In Part 3, the numbers of responses emitted on the left key before a changeover to the right key determined the minimum number of responses that had to be emitted on the right key before a changeover to the left key could occur. This response constraint completely constrained time allocation. These data are consistent with the view that response allocation is a fundamental process (and time allocation a derivative process), or that response and time allocation are independently controlled, in concurrent-schedule performance.

Year:  1991        PMID: 16812632      PMCID: PMC1323054          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1991.55-189

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


  14 in total

1.  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

2.  Choice as time allocation.

Authors:  W M Baum; H C Rachlin
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-11       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Independence of response force and reinforcement rate on concurrent variable-interval schedule performance.

Authors:  I Hunter; M Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  The effects of different component response requirements in multiple and concurrent schedules.

Authors:  M Davison; A Ferguson
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1978-03       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.  Concurrent ratio schedules: Fixed vs. variable response requirements.

Authors:  D P Rider
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Sensitivity to reinforcement in concurrent arithmetic and exponential schedules.

Authors:  R Taylor; M Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1983-01       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.  Is matching compatible with reinforcement maximization on concurrent variable interval variable ratio?

Authors:  R J Herrnstein; G M Heyman
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 2.468

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

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.