Literature DB >> 19159163

Differential outcomes enhance accuracy of delayed matching to sample but not resistance to change.

John A Nevin1, Ryan D Ward, Corina Jimenez-Gomez, Amy L Odum, Timothy A Shahan.   

Abstract

Three experiments assessed the relation between the differential outcomes effect and resistance to change of delayed matching-to-sample performance. Pigeons produced delayed matching-to-sample trials by responding on variable interval schedules in two components of a multiple schedule. In the same-outcome component, the probability of reinforcement was the same for both samples (.9 in Experiments 1 and 2, .5 in Experiment 3); in the different-outcomes component, the probability of reinforcement was .9 for one sample and .1 for the other. In all three experiments, the forgetting functions in the different-outcomes component were higher and shallower than in the same-outcomes component. When total reinforcement was greater in the same-outcomes component (Experiments 1 and 2), resistance to disruption by prefeeding, intercomponent food, extinction, or flashing lights typically was greater in that component. In Experiment 3, when total reinforcement was equated, resistance to disruption was similar across components. Thus, the level and slope of forgetting functions depended on differential reinforcement correlated with the samples, but the resistance to change of forgetting functions depended on total reinforcement in a component. Both aspects of the results can be explained by a model of delayed matching to sample performance. Copyright 2009 APA, all rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19159163      PMCID: PMC2670755          DOI: 10.1037/a0012926

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process        ISSN: 0097-7403


  15 in total

1.  Behavioral momentum and the law of effect.

Authors:  J A Nevin; R C Grace
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  Pigeons may not remember the stimuli that reinforced their recent behavior.

Authors:  D W Schaal; A L Odum; T A Shahan
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Variable-ratio versus variable-interval schedules: response rate, resistance to change, and preference.

Authors:  J A Nevin; S Holland; A P McLean
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Accuracy of discrimination, rate of responding, and resistance to change.

Authors:  John A Nevin; Jessica Milo; Amy L Odum; Timothy A Shahan
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  An investigation of the differential-outcomes effect within sessions.

Authors:  B M Jones; K G White
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  The relation between the generalized matching law and signal-detection theory.

Authors:  M C Davison; R D Tustin
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Uninstructed human responding: sensitivity to ratio and interval contingencies.

Authors:  B A Matthews; E Shimoff; A C Catania; T Sagvolden
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1977-05       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Characteristics of forgetting functions in delayed matching to sample.

Authors:  K G White
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  The optimal correction for estimating extreme discriminability.

Authors:  Glenn S Brown; K Geoffrey White
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2005-08

10.  A theory of attending, remembering, and reinforcement in delayed matching to sample.

Authors:  John A Nevin; Michael Davison; Amy L Odum; Timothy A Shahan
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.468

View more
  8 in total

1.  Stimuli, reinforcers, and private events.

Authors:  John A Nevin
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  2008

2.  Effects of prefeeding, extinction, and distraction during sample and comparison presentation on sensitivity to reinforcer frequency in matching to sample.

Authors:  Ryan D Ward; Robert N Johnson; Amy L Odum
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2009-02-13       Impact factor: 1.777

3.  Sensitivity of conditional-discrimination performance to within-session variation of reinforcer frequency.

Authors:  Ryan D Ward; Amy L Odum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Matching- and nonmatching-to-sample concept learning in rats using olfactory stimuli.

Authors:  L Brooke April; Katherine Bruce; Mark Galizio
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  A delay-specific differential outcomes effect in delayed matching to sample.

Authors:  K Geoffrey White; Rebecca J Sargisson
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.986

6.  Delayed matching to sample: reinforcement has opposite effects on resistance to change in two related procedures.

Authors:  John A Nevin; Timothy A Shahan; Amy L Odum; Ryan Ward
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.986

7.  Differential reinforcement and resistance to change of divided-attention performance.

Authors:  Christopher A Podlesnik; Eric Thrailkill; Timothy A Shahan
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.986

8.  Reinforcement Contingency Learning in Children with ADHD: Back to the Basics of Behavior Therapy.

Authors:  Hasse De Meyer; Tom Beckers; Gail Tripp; Saskia van der Oord
Journal:  J Abnorm Child Psychol       Date:  2019-12
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.