Literature DB >> 17725056

Within-trial contrast: pigeons prefer conditioned reinforcers that follow a relatively more rather than a less aversive event.

Thomas R Zentall1, Rebecca A Singer.   

Abstract

When behavior suggests that the value of a reinforcer depends inversely on the value of the events that precede or follow it, the behavior has been described as a contrast effect. Three major forms of contrast have been studied: incentive contrast, in which a downward (or upward) shift in the magnitude of reinforcement produces a relatively stronger downward (or upward) shift in the vigor of a response; anticipatory contrast, in which a forthcoming improvement in reinforcement results in a relative reduction in consummatory response; and behavioral contrast, in which a decrease in the probability of reinforcement in one component of a multiple schedule results in an increase in responding in an unchanged component of the schedule. Here we discuss a possible fourth kind of contrast that we call within-trial contrast because within a discrete trial, the relative value of an event has an inverse effect on the relative value of the reinforcer that follows. We show that greater effort, longer delay to reinforcement, or the absence of food all result in an increase in the preference for positive discriminative stimuli that follow (relative to less effort, shorter delay, or the presence of food). We further distinguish this within-trial contrast effect from the effects of delay reduction. A general model of this form of contrast is proposed in which the value of a primary or conditioned reinforcer depends on the change in value from the value of the event that precedes it.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17725056      PMCID: PMC1918080          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2007.27-06

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


  31 in total

1.  Economic and biological influences on key pecking and treadle pressing in pigeons.

Authors:  Leonard Green; Daniel D Holt
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Spontaneous alternation behavior.

Authors:  W N DEMBER; H FOWLER
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1958-11       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  Another look at contrast in multiple schedules.

Authors:  B A Williams
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1983-03       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Economic and biological influences on a pigeon's key peck.

Authors:  L Green; H Rachlin
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1975-01       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Inverse relations between preference and contrast.

Authors:  B A Williams
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  The following schedule of reinforcement as a fundamental determinant of steady state contrast in multiple schedules.

Authors:  B A Williams
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1981-05       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Local contrast and Pavlovian induction.

Authors:  J C Malone
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1976-11       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Discriminative stimuli that follow the absence of reinforcement are preferred by pigeons over those that follow reinforcement.

Authors:  Andrea M Friedrich; Tricia S Clement; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.986

Review 9.  Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena.

Authors:  D J Bem
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1967-05       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Backward conditioning: a reevaluation of the empirical evidence.

Authors:  M L Spetch; D M Wilkie; J P Pinel
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 17.737

View more
  16 in total

1.  Examination of the influence of contingency on changes in reinforcer value.

Authors:  Iser G DeLeon; Meagan K Gregory; Michelle A Frank-Crawford; Melissa J Allman; Arthur E Wilke; Abbey B Carreau-Webster; Mandy M Triggs
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2011

2.  Half a century.

Authors:  James E Mazur
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Deprivation level and choice in pigeons: a test of within-trial contrast.

Authors:  Marco Vasconcelos; Peter J Urcuioli
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  Extensive training is insufficient to produce the work-ethic effect in pigeons.

Authors:  Marco Vasconcelos; Peter J Urcuioli
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Cognitive dissonance in children: justification of effort or contrast?

Authors:  Jérôme Alessandri; Jean-Claude Darcheville; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2008-06

6.  The Monty Hall dilemma in pigeons: effect of investment in initial choice.

Authors:  Jessica P Stagner; Rebecca Rayburn-Reeves; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-10

7.  Modulation of ventral striatal activity by cognitive effort.

Authors:  Ekaterina Dobryakova; Ryan K Jessup; Elizabeth Tricomi
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Rhesus monkeys lack a consistent peak-end effect.

Authors:  Eric R Xu; Emily J Knight; Jerald D Kralik
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 2.143

9.  Sub-Optimal Choice by Pigeons: Failure to Support The Allais Paradox.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Jessica P Stagner
Journal:  Learn Motiv       Date:  2011-08-01

10.  Effects of effort and difficulty on human preference for a stimulus: Investigation of the within-trial contrast.

Authors:  Masashi Tsukamoto; Kenichiro Kohara; Koji Takeuchi
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.986

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.