Literature DB >> 18595282

Assessing potency of high- and low-preference reinforcers with respect to response rate and response patterns.

Becky Penrod1, Michele D Wallace, Edwin J Dyer.   

Abstract

Previous research has suggested that the availability of high-preference stimuli may override the reinforcing efficacy of concurrently available low-preference stimuli under relatively low schedule requirements (e.g., fixed-ratio 1 schedule). It is unknown if similar effects would be obtained under higher schedule requirements. Thus, the current study compared high-preference and low-preference reinforcers under progressively increasing schedule requirements. Results for 3 of the 4 participants indicated that high-preference stimuli maintained responding under higher schedule requirements relative to low-preference stimuli. For 1 participant, high-preference and low-preference stimuli were demonstrated to be equally effective reinforcers under increasing schedule requirements. Implications with respect to rate of performance and response patterns are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18595282      PMCID: PMC2408353          DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-177

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal        ISSN: 0021-8855


  13 in total

1.  Effects of increased response effort on self-injury and object manipulation as competing responses.

Authors:  L Zhou; G A Goff
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2000

2.  Assessing reinforcers under progressive schedule requirements.

Authors:  H S Roane; D C Lerman; C M Vorndran
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2001

3.  Progressive ratio as a measure of reward strength.

Authors:  W HODOS
Journal:  Science       Date:  1961-09-29       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities.

Authors:  W Fisher; C C Piazza; L G Bowman; L P Hagopian; J C Owens; I Slevin
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1992

5.  Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment.

Authors:  H S Roane; T R Vollmer; J E Ringdahl; B A Marcus
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1998

6.  Emergence of reinforcer preference as a function of schedule requirements and stimulus similarity.

Authors:  I G DeLeon; B A Iwata; H L Goh; A S Worsdell
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1997

7.  Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences.

Authors:  I G DeLeon; B A Iwata
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1996

8.  Relative versus absolute reinforcement effects: implications for preference assessments.

Authors:  E M Roscoe; B A Iwata; S Kahng
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1999

9.  Preference testing: a comparison of two presentation methods.

Authors:  J Windsor; L M Piché; P A Locke
Journal:  Res Dev Disabil       Date:  1994 Nov-Dec

10.  Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals.

Authors:  G M Pace; M T Ivancic; G L Edwards; B A Iwata; T J Page
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1985
View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Translational Assessment of Reward and Motivational Deficits in Psychiatric Disorders.

Authors:  Andre Der-Avakian; Samuel A Barnes; Athina Markou; Diego A Pizzagalli
Journal:  Curr Top Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016

Review 2.  On the applied use of progressive-ratio schedules of reinforcement.

Authors:  Henry S Roane
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2008

3.  On the correspondence between preference assessment outcomes and progressive-ratio schedule assessments of stimulus value.

Authors:  Iser G DeLeon; Michelle A Frank; Meagan K Gregory; Melissa J Allman
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2009

4.  A quantitative review of overjustification effects in persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Authors:  Allison Levy; Iser G DeLeon; Catherine K Martinez; Nathalie Fernandez; Nicholas A Gage; Sigurdur Óli Sigurdsson; Michelle A Frank-Crawford
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2016-10-14

5.  Correspondence between single versus daily preference assessment outcomes and reinforcer efficacy under progressive-ratio schedules.

Authors:  Nathan A Call; Nicole M Trosclair-Lasserre; Addie J Findley; Andrea R Reavis; M Alice Shillingsburg
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2012

6.  Measurement of food reinforcement in preschool children. Associations with food intake, BMI, and reward sensitivity.

Authors:  Brandi Y Rollins; Eric Loken; Jennifer S Savage; Leann L Birch
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 3.868

7.  Systematic assessment of food item preference and reinforcer effectiveness: Enhancements in training laboratory-housed rhesus macaques.

Authors:  Allison L Martin; Andrea N Franklin; Jaine E Perlman; Mollie A Bloomsmith
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2018-07-09       Impact factor: 1.777

Review 8.  Reinforcement Learning in Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Authors:  Manuela Schuetze; Christiane S Rohr; Deborah Dewey; Adam McCrimmon; Signe Bray
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-11-21
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.