Choice and Delay of Reinforcement: Effects of Terminal-link Stimulus and Response Conditions
Overview
Social Sciences
Affiliations
In two experiments, pigeons were exposed to concurrent-chains schedules in which a single initial-link variable-interval schedule led to access to terminal links composed of fixed-interval or fixed-delay schedules. In Experiment 1, an 8-s (or 16-s) delay to reinforcement was associated with the standard key, while reinforcer delay values associated with the experimental key were varied from 4 to 32 s. The results of Experiment 1 showed undermatching of response ratios to delay ratios with terminal-link fixed-delay schedules, whereas in some pigeons matching or overmatching was evident with the fixed-interval schedules. In Experiment 2, one pair of reinforcer delay values, either 8 versus 16 s or 16 versus 32 s, was used. In the first condition of Experiment 2, different delays were associated with different keylight stimuli (cued condition). In the second condition, different terminal-link delays were associated with the same stimulus, either a blackout (uncued-blackout condition) or a white key (uncued-white condition). To examine the role of responses emitted during delays, the keys were retracted during a delay (key-absent condition) in the third condition and responses were required by a fixed-interval schedule in the fourth condition. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the choice proportions for the shorter delay were more extreme in the cued condition than in the uncued-blackout condition, and that the response requirement imposed by the fixed-interval schedules did not affect choice of the shorter delay, nor did the key-absent and key-present conditions. These results indicate that the keylight-stimulus conditions affected preference for the shorter of two delays and that the findings obtained in Experiment 1 depended mainly on the keylight-stimulus conditions of the terminal links (i.e., the conditioned reinforcing value of the terminal-link stimuli).
A decision model for steady-state choice in concurrent chains.
Christensen D, Grace R J Exp Anal Behav. 2011; 94(2):227-40.
PMID: 21451750 PMC: 2929087. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2010.94-227.
Some effects of procedural variations on choice responding in concurrent chains.
Moore J J Exp Anal Behav. 2010; 92(3):345-65.
PMID: 20514166 PMC: 2771668. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2009.92-345.
Local effects of delayed food.
Davison M, Baum W J Exp Anal Behav. 2007; 87(2):241-60.
PMID: 17465314 PMC: 1832169. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2007.13-06.
Cued and uncued terminal links in concurrent-chains schedules.
Alsop B, Stewart K, Honig W J Exp Anal Behav. 1994; 62(3):385-97.
PMID: 16812748 PMC: 1334474. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1994.62-385.
A contextual model of concurrent-chains choice.
Grace R J Exp Anal Behav. 1994; 61(1):113-29.
PMID: 16812722 PMC: 1334358. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-113.