Premium
DOES SENSITIVITY TO MAGNITUDE DEPEND ON THE TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTION OF REINFORCEMENT?
Author(s) -
Grace Randolph C.,
Bragason Orn
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
journal of the experimental analysis of behavior
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.75
H-Index - 61
eISSN - 1938-3711
pISSN - 0022-5002
DOI - 10.1901/jeab.2005.28-04
Subject(s) - reinforcement , matching law , interval (graph theory) , statistics , preference , variable (mathematics) , mathematics , sensitivity (control systems) , psychology , terminal (telecommunication) , social psychology , computer science , combinatorics , mathematical analysis , electronic engineering , engineering , telecommunications
Our research addressed the question of whether sensitivity to relative reinforcer magnitude in concurrent chains depends on the distribution of reinforcer delays when the terminal‐link schedules are equal. In Experiment 1, 12 pigeons responded in a two‐component procedure. In both components, the initial links were concurrent variable‐interval 40 s variable‐interval 40 s, and the terminal links were both 20‐s interval schedules in which responses were reinforced by either 4 s of grain in one, or 2 s of grain in the other. The only difference between the components was whether the terminal‐link schedules were fixed interval or variable intervals. For all subjects, the relative rate of responding in the initial links for the terminal link that produced the 4‐s reinforcer was greater when the terminal links were fixed‐interval schedules than when they were variable‐interval schedules. This result is contrary to the prediction of Grace's (1994) contextual choice model, but is consistent with both Mazur's (2001) hyperbolic value‐added model and Killeen's (1985) incentive theory. In Experiment 2, 4 pigeons responded in a concurrent‐chains procedure in which 4‐s or 2‐s reinforcers were provided independently of responding according to equal fixed‐time or mixed‐time schedules. Preference for the 4‐s reinforcer increased as the variability of the intervals comprising the mixed‐time schedules was decreased. Generalized‐matching sensitivity of initial‐link response allocation to relative reinforcer magnitude was proportional to the geometric mean of the terminal‐link delays.