A Computational Theory of Selection by Consequences Applied to Concurrent Schedules

Overview

Journal J Exp Anal Behav

Specialties Psychology
Social Sciences

Date 2008 Dec 17

PMID 19070343

Citations 13

Authors

J J McDowell

Marcia L Caron

Saule Kulubekova

John P Berg

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Virtual organisms animated by a computational theory of selection by consequences responded on symmetrical and asymmetrical concurrent schedules of reinforcement. The theory instantiated Darwinian principles of selection, reproduction, and mutation such that a population of potential behaviors evolved under the selection pressure exerted by reinforcement from the environment. The virtual organisms' steady-state behavior was well described by the power function matching equation, and the parameters of the equation behaved in ways that were consistent with findings from experiments with live organisms. Together with previous research on single-alternative schedules (McDowell, 2004; McDowell & Caron, 2007) these results indicate that the equations of matching theory are emergent properties of the evolutionary dynamics of selection by consequences.

Citing Articles

Empirically validating a computational model of automatic behavior shaping.

Berardi V, Lan T, Guirguis A, Maoz U PLoS One. 2025; 20(1):e0313925.

PMID: 39820204 PMC: 11737743. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313925.

Application of the evolutionary theory of behavior dynamics to severe challenging behavior.

P Hagopian L, Falligant J J Appl Behav Anal. 2023; 56(4):729-744.

PMID: 37614037 PMC: 10591871. DOI: 10.1002/jaba.1018.

Creating and Studying the Behavior of Artificial Organisms Animated by an Evolutionary Theory of Behavior Dynamics.

McDowell J Perspect Behav Sci. 2023; 46(1):119-136.

PMID: 37006601 PMC: 10050662. DOI: 10.1007/s40614-023-00366-1.

Modeling Subtypes of Automatically Reinforced Self-Injurious Behavior with the Evolutionary Theory of Behavior Dynamics.

Morris S, McDowell J Perspect Behav Sci. 2022; 44(4):581-603.

PMID: 35098026 PMC: 8738813. DOI: 10.1007/s40614-021-00297-9.

Empirical Matching, Matching Theory, and an Evolutionary Theory of Behavior Dynamics in Clinical Application.

McDowell J Perspect Behav Sci. 2022; 44(4):561-580.

PMID: 35098025 PMC: 8738809. DOI: 10.1007/s40614-021-00296-w.

References

Killeen P . Incentive theory: II. Models for choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982; 38(2):217-32. PMC: 1347819. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1982.38-217. View

Brownstein A, Pliskoff S . Some effects of relative reinforcement rate and changeover delay in response-independent concurrent schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968; 11(6):683-8. PMC: 1338621. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-683. View

Herrnstein R . On the law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970; 13(2):243-66. PMC: 1333768. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-243. View

Baum W . Chained concurrent schedules: reinforcement as situation transition. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974; 22(1):91-101. PMC: 1333245. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-91. View

FLESHLER M, Hoffman H . A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962; 5:529-30. PMC: 1404199. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-529. View

Shimp C . Probabilistically reinforced choice behavior in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1966; 9(4):443-55. PMC: 1338246. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1966.9-443. View

McDowell J . Two modern developments in matching theory. Behav Anal. 2012; 12(2):153-66. PMC: 2742119. DOI: 10.1007/BF03392492. View

McDowell J . On the classic and modern theories of matching. J Exp Anal Behav. 2005; 84(1):111-27. PMC: 1243894. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2005.59-04. View

Baum W . Optimization and the matching law as accounts of instrumental behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981; 36(3):387-403. PMC: 1333108. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1981.36-387. View

10.

Gibbon J . Dynamics of time matching: Arousal makes better seem worse. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013; 2(2):208-15. DOI: 10.3758/BF03210960. View

11.

Gallistel C, King A, Gottlieb D, Balci F, Papachristos E, Szalecki M . Is matching innate?. J Exp Anal Behav. 2007; 87(2):161-99. PMC: 1832166. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2007.92-05. View

12.

Baum W . On two types of deviation from the matching law: bias and undermatching. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974; 22(1):231-42. PMC: 1333261. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-231. View

13.

Baum W, Rachlin H . Choice as time allocation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969; 12(6):861-74. PMC: 1338696. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-861. View

14.

Herrnstein R . Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961; 4:267-72. PMC: 1404074. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-267. View

15.

McDowell J, Caron M . Undermatching is an emergent property of selection by consequences. Behav Processes. 2007; 75(2):97-106. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2007.02.017. View

16.

Dallery J, Soto P, McDowell J . A test of the formal and modern theories of matching. J Exp Anal Behav. 2005; 84(2):129-45. PMC: 1243976. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2005.108-04. View

17.

Kulubekova S, McDowell J . A computational model of selection by consequences: log survivor plots. Behav Processes. 2008; 78(2):291-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2007.12.005. View

18.

Shimp C . Computational behavior dynamics: an alternative description of Nevin (1969). J Exp Anal Behav. 1992; 57(3):289-99. PMC: 1323231. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-289. View

19.

Myerson J, Hale S . Choice in transition: A comparison of melioration and the kinetic model. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988; 49(2):291-302. PMC: 1338814. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1988.49-291. View

20.

Donahoe J, Burgos J, Palmer D . A selectionist approach to reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993; 60(1):17-40. PMC: 1322144. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1993.60-17. View