Literature DB >> 21451747

Development and maintenance of choice in a dynamic environment.

Andrew M Rodewald1, Christine E Hughes, Raymond C Pitts.   

Abstract

Four pigeons were exposed to a concurrent procedure similar to that used by Davison, Baum, and colleagues (e.g., Davison & Baum, 2000, 2006) in which seven components were arranged in a mixed schedule, and each programmed a different left∶right reinforcer ratio (1∶27, 1∶9, 1∶3, 1∶1, 3∶1, 9∶1, 27∶1). Components within each session were presented randomly, lasted for 10 reinforcers each, and were separated by 10-s blackouts. These conditions were in effect for 100 sessions. When data were aggregated over Sessions 16-50, the present results were similar to those reported by Davison, Baum, and colleagues: (a) preference adjusted rapidly (i.e., sensitivity to reinforcement increased) within components; (b) preference for a given alternative increased with successive reinforcers delivered via that alternative (continuations), but was substantially attenuated following a reinforcer on the other alternative (a discontinuation); and (c) food deliveries produced preference pulses (immediate, local, increases in preference for the just-reinforced alternative). The same analyses were conducted across 10-session blocks for Sessions 1-100. In general, the basic structure of choice revealed by analyses of data from Sessions 16-50 was preserved at a smaller level of aggregation (10 sessions), and it developed rapidly (within the first 10 sessions). Some characteristics of choice, however, changed systematically across sessions. For example, effects of successive reinforcers within a component tended to increase across sessions, as did the magnitude and length of the preference pulses. Thus, models of choice under these conditions may need to take into account variations in behavior allocation that are not captured completely when data are aggregated over large numbers of sessions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acquisition; behavioral dynamics; choice; concurrent schedules; key peck; pigeons; reinforcement

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21451747      PMCID: PMC2929084          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2010.94-175

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


  26 in total

1.  Choice in a variable environment: effects of blackout duration and extinction between components.

Authors:  Michael Davison; William M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Reinforcer-ratio variation and its effects on rate of adaptation.

Authors:  J Landon; M Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Choice in a variable environment: effects of unequal reinforcer distributions.

Authors:  Jason Landon; Michael Davison; Douglas Elliffe
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Every reinforcer counts: reinforcer magnitude and local preference.

Authors:  Michael Davison; William M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  A progression for generating variable-interval schedules.

Authors:  M FLESHLER; H S HOFFMAN
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1962-10       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  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

7.  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

8.  Do conditional reinforcers count?

Authors:  Michael Davison; William M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Local effects of delayed food.

Authors:  Michael Davison; William M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Modeling the dynamics of choice.

Authors:  William M Baum; Michael Davison
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2009-01-31       Impact factor: 1.777

View more
  3 in total

1.  Rethinking reinforcement: allocation, induction, and contingency.

Authors:  William M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Contingent stimuli signal subsequent reinforcer ratios.

Authors:  Nathalie Boutros; Michael Davison; Douglas Elliffe
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Examining the discriminative and strengthening effects of reinforcers in concurrent schedules.

Authors:  Nathalie Boutros; Douglas Elliffe; Michael Davison
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.468

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.