English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Rats (Experiment 1) and pigeons (Experiment 2) responded on several concurrent fixed interval variable interval schedules. The programmed rate of reinforcement varied from 15 to 240 reinforcers per hour across conditions for each component. The rate of, but not the time spent, responding on each component usually changed within sessions. The patterns of changes in response rates within the session were similar enough for the two components that the bias and sensitivity to reinforcement parameters of, and the percentage of the variance accounted for by, the generalized matching law did not change within the session. These results imply that within-session changes in responding do not cause problems for assessing the validity of the generalized matching law when subjects respond on concurrent fixed interval variable interval schedules. They may help to explain why the matching law provides a good description of the data.

Within-session changes in responding during concurrent fixed interval variable interval schedules