Literature DB >> 6502069

Optimization versus response-strength accounts of behavior.

W Vaughan, H L Miller.   

Abstract

Pigeons were run in both single-key and concurrent-key experiments in which, over most of the range of response rates, an increase in response rate gave rise to a continuous decrease in reinforcement rate. In spite of the fact that a low response rate would have produced a high reinforcement rate, all birds responded at relatively high rates, thus keeping reinforcement rates substantially below the maximum possible. In the concurrent-key experiment, in addition to responding at relatively high rates, the birds' ratios of responses approximately matched the corresponding ratios of obtained reinforcers. The results are inconsistent with most theories of optimal performance, which assume that organisms behave in ways that either maximize reinforcement value or minimize deviations from a free-behavior point. On the other hand, the results are consistent with the assumption that reinforcement strengthens the tendency to respond.

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6502069      PMCID: PMC1348087          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-337

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


  12 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  Toward empirical behavior laws. I. positive reinforcement.

Authors:  D PREMACK
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1959-07       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  On the law of effect.

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

5.  Concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules can provide only weak evidence for matching.

Authors:  J M Ziriax; A Silberberg
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  A molar theory of reinforcement schedules.

Authors:  H Rachlin
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  Optimization and the matching law as accounts of instrumental behavior.

Authors:  W M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1981-11       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Is matching compatible with reinforcement maximization on concurrent variable interval variable ratio?

Authors:  R J Herrnstein; G M Heyman
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  The correlation-based law of effect.

Authors:  W M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1973-07       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  What is the necessary and sufficient condition for reinforcement in the contingency situation?

Authors:  R Eisenberger; M Karpman; J Trattner
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1967-07
View more
  25 in total

1.  Stock optimizing in choice when a token deposit is the operant.

Authors:  J J Widholm; A Silberberg; S R Hursh; A A Imam; F R Warren-Boulton
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  From molecular to molar: a paradigm shift in behavior analysis.

Authors:  William M Baum
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 2.468

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

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

4.  Repertoire-altering effects of remote contingencies.

Authors:  J Michael
Journal:  Anal Verbal Behav       Date:  1986

5.  When we speak of integrating..

Authors:  T D Hackenberg
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  1987

Review 6.  The copyist model of response emission.

Authors:  Takayuki Tanno; Alan Silberberg
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-10

7.  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

8.  Sensitivity of time allocation to an overall reinforcer rate feedback function in concurrent interval schedules.

Authors:  M Davison; A Kerr
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.468

9.  Behavior dynamics: One perspective.

Authors:  M J Marr
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 2.468

10.  Maximizing present value: A model to explain why moderate response rates obtain on variable-interval schedules.

Authors:  A Silberberg; F R Warren-Boulton; T Asano
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 2.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.