Literature DB >> 26299548

An alternative to the stay/switch equation assessed when using a changeover-delay.

James S MacDonall1.   

Abstract

An alternative to the generalized matching equation for understanding concurrent performances is the stay/switch model. For the stay/switch model, the important events are the contingencies and behaviors at each alternative. The current experiment compares the descriptions by two stay/switch equations, the original, empirically derived stay/switch equation and a more theoretically derived equation based on ratios of stay to switch responses matching ratios of stay to switch reinforcers. The present experiment compared descriptions by the original stay/switch equation when using and not using a changeover delay. It also compared descriptions by the more theoretical equation with and without a changeover delay. Finally, it compared descriptions of the concurrent performances by these two equations. Rats were trained in 15 conditions on identical concurrent random-interval schedules in each component of a multiple schedule. A COD operated in only one component. There were no consistent differences in the variance accounted for by each equation of concurrent performances whether or not a COD was used. The simpler equation found greater sensitivity to stay than to switch reinforcers. It also found a COD eliminated the influence of switch reinforcers. Because estimates of parameters were more meaningful when using the more theoretical stay/switch equation it is preferred.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COD; Changeover delay; Concurrent choice; Lever press; RI; Random interval; Stay/switch model; VI; rats; variable interval

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26299548      PMCID: PMC4618195          DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2015.08.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Processes        ISSN: 0376-6357            Impact factor:   1.777


  17 in total

1.  Synthesizing concurrent interval performances.

Authors:  J S MacDonall
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Reinforcing staying and switching while using a changeover delay.

Authors:  James S MacDonall
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Matching behavior and the representation of value in the parietal cortex.

Authors:  Leo P Sugrue; Greg S Corrado; William T Newsome
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-06-18       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Earning and obtaining reinforcers under concurrent interval scheduling.

Authors:  James S MacDonall
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  On the law of effect.

Authors:  R J Herrnstein
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1970-03       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  A local model of concurrent performance.

Authors:  J Macdonall
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Is there a decisive test between matching and maximizing?

Authors:  H Rachlin; L Green; B Tormey
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Momentary maximizing and optimal foraging theories of performance on concurrent VR schedules.

Authors:  James S MacDonall; Jon Goodell; Anthony Juliano
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2006-03-07       Impact factor: 1.777

9.  Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice.

Authors:  W M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Changeover delay and concurrent schedules: some effects on relative performance measures.

Authors:  R L Shull; S S Pliskoff
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1967-11       Impact factor: 2.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.