Literature DB >> 1774539

Choice as a function of local versus molar reinforcement contingencies.

B A Williams1.   

Abstract

Rats were trained on a discrete-trial probability learning task. In Experiment 1, the molar reinforcement probabilities for the two response alternatives were equal, and the local contingencies of reinforcement differentially reinforced a win-stay, lose-shift response pattern. The win-stay portion was learned substantially more easily and appeared from the outset of training, suggesting that its occurrence did not depend upon discrimination of the local contingencies but rather only upon simple strengthening effects of individual reinforcements. Control by both types of local contingencies decreased with increases in the intertrial interval, although some control remained with intertrial intervals as long as 30 s. In Experiment 2, the local contingencies always favored win-shift and lose-shift response patterns but were asymmetrical for the two responses, causing the molar reinforcement rates for the two responses to differ. Some learning of the alternation pattern occurred with short intertrial intervals, although win-stay behavior occurred for some subjects. The local reinforcement contingencies were discriminated poorly with longer intertrial intervals. In the absence of control by the local contingencies, choice proportion was determined by the molar contingencies, as indicated by high exponent values for the generalized matching law with long intertrial intervals, and lower values with short intertrial intervals. The results show that when molar contingencies of reinforcement and local contingencies are in opposition, both may have independent roles. Control by molar contingencies cannot generally be explained by local contingencies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1774539      PMCID: PMC1323133          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1991.56-455

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


  15 in total

1.  Interval reinforcement of choice behavior in discrete trials.

Authors:  J A Nevin
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1969-11       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Non-spatial delayed alternation by the pigeon.

Authors:  B A Williams
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1971-07       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Choice behavior on discrete trials: a demonstration of the occurrence of a response strategy.

Authors:  A Silberberg; D R Williams
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-03       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Probability learning as a function of momentary reinforcement probability.

Authors:  B A Williams
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1972-05       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Spatial learning as an adaptation in hummingbirds.

Authors:  S Cole; F R Hainsworth; A C Kamil; T Mercier; L L Wolf
Journal:  Science       Date:  1982-08-13       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Choice behavior in transition: development of preference for the higher probability of reinforcement.

Authors:  J T Bailey; J E Mazur
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Parametric manipulation of interresponse-time contingency independent of reinforcement rate.

Authors:  G Galbicka; J R Platt
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1986-10

8.  Mazes, maps, and memory.

Authors:  D S Olton
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  1979-07

9.  Probabilistically reinforced choice behavior in pigeons.

Authors:  C P Shimp
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1966-07       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
  10 in total

1.  The dynamics of the law of effect: a comparison of models.

Authors:  Michael A Navakatikyan; Michael Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Concurrent VR VI schedules: primacy of molar control of preference and molecular control of response rates.

Authors:  Takayuki Tanno; Alan Silberberg; Takayuki Sakagami
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.986

3.  Adaptation, teleology, and selection by consequences.

Authors:  Jon D Ringen
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Short-term and long-term effects of reinforcers on choice.

Authors:  R L Buckner; L Green; J Myerson
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Bayesian analysis of foraging by pigeons (Columba livia).

Authors:  P R Killeen; G M Palombo; L R Gottlob; J Beam
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1996-10

6.  Timing in a variable interval procedure: evidence for a memory singularity.

Authors:  Matthew S Matell; Jung S Kim; Loryn Hartshorne
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 1.777

Review 7.  Measuring reinforcement learning and motivation constructs in experimental animals: relevance to the negative symptoms of schizophrenia.

Authors:  Athina Markou; John D Salamone; Timothy J Bussey; Adam C Mar; Daniela Brunner; Gary Gilmour; Peter Balsam
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 8.989

8.  The Memory Trace Supporting Lose-Shift Responding Decays Rapidly after Reward Omission and Is Distinct from Other Learning Mechanisms in Rats.

Authors:  Aaron J Gruber; Rajat Thapa
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2016-11-17

9.  Win-stay and win-shift lever-press strategies in an appetitively reinforced task for rats.

Authors:  Phil Reed
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.986

10.  Feeder Approach between Trials Is Increased by Uncertainty and Affects Subsequent Choices.

Authors:  Aaron J Gruber; Rajat Thapa; Sienna H Randolph
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2018-01-08
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.