Conditional Reinforcers and Informative Stimuli in a Constant Environment

Overview

Journal J Exp Anal Behav

Specialties Psychology
Social Sciences

Date 2009 Feb 24

PMID 19230511

Citations 5

Authors

Nathalie Boutros

Michael Davison

Douglas Elliffe

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Five pigeons responded on steady-state concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules of food presentation in which half of the foods were removed and replaced with nonfood stimuli. Across conditions, the stimuli were either paired or unpaired with food, and the correlation between the ratio of food deliveries on the two alternatives and the ratio of nonfood stimuli was either -1, 0, or +1. Neither the pairing of stimuli with food, nor the correlation between stimuli and food, affected generalized-matching performance, but paired stimuli had a demonstrable effect at a local level of analysis. This effect was independent of the food-stimulus correlation. These results differ from results previously obtained in a frequently changing environment. We attribute this difference in results to differences in the information value of response-contingent stimuli in frequently changing versus relatively constant environments, as well as to differences between forward pairing and simultaneous pairing of the stimuli with food.

Citing Articles

Information: theory, brain, and behavior.

Jensen G, Ward R, Balsam P J Exp Anal Behav. 2013; 100(3):408-31.

PMID: 24122456 PMC: 5226236. DOI: 10.1002/jeab.49.

Reinforcement: food signals the time and location of future food.

Cowie S, Davison M, Elliffe D J Exp Anal Behav. 2011; 96(1):63-86.

PMID: 21765546 PMC: 3136894. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2011.96-63.

Contingent stimuli signal subsequent reinforcer ratios.

Boutros N, Davison M, Elliffe D J Exp Anal Behav. 2011; 96(1):39-61.

PMID: 21765545 PMC: 3136893. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2011.96-39.

Emergent stimulus relations depend on stimulus correlation and not on reinforcement contingencies.

Minster S, Elliffe D, Muthukumaraswamy S J Exp Anal Behav. 2011; 95(3):327-42.

PMID: 21547070 PMC: 3088075. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2011.95-327.

Stimulus effects on local preference: stimulus-response contingencies, stimulus-food pairing, and stimulus-food correlation.

Davison M, Baum W J Exp Anal Behav. 2010; 93(1):45-59.

PMID: 20676267 PMC: 2801540. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2010.93-45.

References

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

Landon J, Davison M, Elliffe D . Concurrent schedules: short- and long-term effects of reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 2002; 77(3):257-71. PMC: 1284860. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2002.77-257. View

Stubbs D, Silverman P . Second-order schedules: brief shock at the completion of each component. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972; 17(2):201-12. PMC: 1333960. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1972.17-201. View

LANDON J, Davison M . Reinforcer-ratio variation and its effects on rate of adaptation. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001; 75(2):207-34. PMC: 1284815. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2001.75-207. View

Davison M, Baum W . Do conditional reinforcers count?. J Exp Anal Behav. 2006; 86(3):269-83. PMC: 1679975. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2006.56-05. View

Neuringer A, Chung S . Quasi-reinforcement: control of responding by a percentage-reinforcement schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967; 10(1):45-54. PMC: 1338316. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-45. View

Squires N, Fantino E . A model for choice in simple concurrent and concurrent-chains schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971; 15(1):27-38. PMC: 1333777. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-27. View

Cohen S, Stubbs D . Discriminative properties of briefly presented stimuli. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976; 25(1):15-25. PMC: 1333411. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1976.25-15. View

Belke T, Heyman G . Increasing and signaling background reinforcement: effect on the foreground response-reinforcer relation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994; 61(1):65-81. PMC: 1334354. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-65. View

10.

Stubbs D . Second-order schedules and the problem of conditioned reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971; 16(3):289-313. PMC: 1333931. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1971.16-289. View

11.

Davison M, Baum W . Choice in a variable environment: every reinforcer counts. J Exp Anal Behav. 2000; 74(1):1-24. PMC: 1284782. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-1. View

12.

Kelleher R . Conditioned reinforcement in second-order schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1966; 9(5):475-85. PMC: 1338201. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1966.9-475. View

13.

Rescorla R . Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures. Psychol Rev. 1967; 74(1):71-80. DOI: 10.1037/h0024109. View

14.

Davison M, Baum W . Choice in a variable environment: effects of blackout duration and extinction between components. J Exp Anal Behav. 2002; 77(1):65-89. PMC: 1284848. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2002.77-65. View

15.

Lobb B, Davison M . Performance in concurrent interval schedules: a systematic replication. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975; 24(2):191-7. PMC: 1333399. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1975.24-191. View

16.

Landon J, Davison M, Elliffe D . Concurrent schedules: reinforcer magnitude effects. J Exp Anal Behav. 2003; 79(3):351-65. PMC: 1284939. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2003.79-351. View

17.

Krageloh C, Davison M, Elliffe D . Local preference in concurrent schedules: the effects of reinforcer sequences. J Exp Anal Behav. 2005; 84(1):37-64. PMC: 1243896. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2005.114-04. View

18.

Cohen S, Calisto G, Lentz B . Separating the reinforcing and discriminative properties of brief-stimulus presentations in second-order schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979; 32(2):149-56. PMC: 1332891. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1979.32-149. View

19.

Dinsmoor J . The etymology of basic concepts in the experimental analysis of behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 2005; 82(3):311-6. PMC: 1285013. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2004.82-311. View

20.

Baum W . Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979; 32(2):269-81. PMC: 1332902. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1979.32-269. View