Concurrent‐schedule Performance: Effects of Relative and Overall Reinforcer Rate

Abstract

Six pigeons were trained to respond on two keys, each of which provided reinforcers on an arithmetic variable-interval schedule. These concurrent schedules ran nonindependently with a 2-s changeover delay. Six sets of conditions were conducted. Within each set of conditions the ratio of reinforcers available on the two alternatives was varied, but the arranged overall reinforcer rate remained constant. Each set of conditions used a different overall reinforcer rate, ranging from 0.22 reinforcers per minute to 10 reinforcers per minute. The generalized matching law fit the data from each set of conditions, but sensitivity to reinforcer frequency (a) decreased as the overall reinforcer rate decreased for both time allocation and response allocation based analyses of the data. Overall response rates did not vary with changes in relative reinforcer rate, but decreased with decreases in overall reinforcer rate. Changeover rates varied as a function of both relative and overall reinforcer rates. However, as explanations based on changeover rate seem unable to deal with the changes in generalized matching sensitivity, discrimination accounts of choice may offer a more promising interpretation.

Global undernutrition during gestation influences learning during adult life

“…When the overall reinforcer rate was increased in Condition 2, higher values of sensitivity to reinforcement were obtained in both groups. This increase is the established result, both in steady-state concurrent-schedule procedures (Alsop & Elliffe, 1988;Elliffe & Alsop, 1996) and in the frequently changing procedure used in the present study (Davison & Baum, 2000). However, when the overall reinforcer rate was decreased to the lowest value tested in Condition 3, sensitivity to reinforcement values decreased, but not below the Condition 1 levels.…”

Divided attention and the matching law: Sample duration affects sensitivity to reinforcement allocation

“…First, Alsop and Elliffe (1988) showed that sensitivity to variations in relative reinforcement increases with increases in overall rates of reinforcement. Given the lower overall accuracies with the shorter sample duration in the present experiment, one Bias (log b) 9 3 6 9 5 6 1 4 4 2 3 2 9 6 6 9 5 7 1 1 5 8 2 2 2 9 3 6 9 5 6 1 4 4 2 3 2 9 6 6 9 5 7 1 1 5 8 2 2 2…”

Self-control in the monkeymacaca fascicularis

“…Relatively greater values ofSAlSD are thus associated with more self-control and vice versa. Note that the generalized matching law is being used here simply as a scaling method, independently ofits validity as a general model of choice (Alsop & Elliffe, 1988;Logue, Forzano, & Tobin, 1992;McCarthy, 1991).…”