Different levels of performance with equivalent weights of reward

McCain, Garvin

doi:10.3758/bf03336393

Cited by 18 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It should be noted that these results are not necessarily inconsistent with those reported by McCain (1969McCain ( , 1970McCain ( , 1971. The data reported by McCain (1969McCain ( , 1970McCain, Dyleski, & McElvain, 1971) showed that reward magnitude effects did develop but were limited to the early stages of acquisition and had dissipated appreciably as training progressed, with virtually no differences being shown between large-and small-reward subjects after approximately 50 trials. Had Phase I of the present study been extended beyond 51 trials, it is quite possible that the observed magnitUde effects would have eventually dissipated.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 51%

“…First, the traditional assumption concerning the effectiveness of reward magnitude was supported, at least in the case of the normal and sham subjects, in that the performance of both llL and lL subjects in these squads was superior to that of the respective small-reward subjects at the conclusion of the 51 trials of Phase I. It should be noted that these results are not necessarily inconsistent with those reported by McCain (1969McCain ( , 1970McCain ( , 1971. The data reported by McCain (1969McCain ( , 1970McCain, Dyleski, & McElvain, 1971) showed that reward magnitude effects did develop but were limited to the early stages of acquisition and had dissipated appreciably as training progressed, with virtually no differences being shown between large-and small-reward subjects after approximately 50 trials.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Runway performance of normal, sham, and anosmic rats as a function of magnitude of reward and magnitude shift

Davis

Harper

Seago

1975

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A two-phase experiment was designed to yield information concerning the effects of magnitude of reward and magnitude shifts on the runway performance of normal, sham-operated, and surgically anosmic rats. Three squads of normal. sham, and anosmic subjects were each divided into three subgroups that received small. multiple-pellet large and single-pellet large reward, respectively, during the first phase (51 trials). During Phase II (30 trials), all subjects received the small reward. Reward magnitude effects developed during Phase I but were shown only by the normal and sham sUbjects. Significant depression effects were shown during Phase II by all subjects shifted from large to small reward. However, the form ofthe performance decrements shown during Phase II differed considerably between the normal and sham subjects and the anosmic sUbjects.Recent studies reported by Marrero, Davis, and Seago (1973) and Davis and Seago (1975) have been concerned with delineating the behavioral effects of rendering the rat subject anosmic. In both instances, the straight-runway apparatus was employed for testing purposes. The results of the Marrero et al. (1973) study in which reward magnitude (single-pellet large vs. single-pellet small) was manipulated indicated that magnitude effects were not shown by the anosmic subjects and further that the performance of the large-reward anosmic subjects was somehwat inferior (significantly so in the start measure) to that of the small-reward anosmic subjects.On the other hand, the Davis and Seago (1975) experiment studied the effects of anosmia on behavior in the differential conditioning situation. The results of this study indicated that differential responding failed to develop, thus suggesting, as did the Marrero et a1. (1973) study, that one effect of anosmia is to reduce incentive motivation. It is interesting to note that when the anosmic subjects were concurrently exposed to different reward magnitudes, as in the Davis and Seago (1975) Thus, the present experiment was designed to yield additional, and hopefully more complete, information on the effects of reward magnitude and reward magnitude reduction upon the runway performance of surgically anosmic subjects. During the first phase of the experiment, a factorial design employing three levels of reward magnitude (small, single-pellet large, and multiple-pellet large) and three olfactory states (normal, sham-operated, and surgically anosmic) was used. During the second phase of the study, all subjects received additional trials with the small-reward magnitude. Thus, the second phase constituted an incentive reduction phase for those subjects initially trained on large reward and was included to yield information concerning the effects of a successive, as compared with the simultaneous procedure employed by Davis and Seago (1975), shift in reinforcement. METHOD SubjectsThe subjects were 81 male albino rats purchased from the Sprague-Dawley Company, Madison, Wisconsin. Twenty-seven of the subjects were rendered surgically anosmi...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 51%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Runway performance of normal, sham, and anosmic rats as a function of magnitude of reward and magnitude shift

Davis

Harper

Seago

1975

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rather than resolving or clarifying issues, the present data may serve to increase the complexity in this area. In addition to such factors as single-vs. multiple-pellet rewards (see Daly, 1972;McCain, 1969), possible satiation effects (Campbell et al, 1972), particular aspect or segment of the instrumental response that is reported (Davis et aI., 1976), number of acquisition trials administered (Davis et aI., 1976;McCain, 1970), and type of data subjected to analysis (see Traupmann & Wong, 1971), it now appears relevant to consider which trials are reported in those cases involving the administration of multiple daily trials. Obviously, the traditional and possibly simplistic view that larger reward magnitudes result in faster acquisition and/or higher asymptotic performance levels must be tempered to take into account this increasing list of relevant parameters.…”

Section: Reward Magnitude Effects 365mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, such factors as satiation (Campbell et aI., 1972), single-vs. multiplepellet rewards (Daly, 1972;McCain, 1969), rate of approach to asymptote (McHose & Moore, 1976), preexperimental diet (prytula, Davis, & Voorhees, 1978), and the particular segment of the instrumental response chain that is measured or reported (Davis et aI., 1976) have been shown to be related to the development and/or collapse of reward magnitude effects. In reviewing these apparently divergent results, as well as 11 large-vs. small-reward comparisons from their own laboratory, McHose and Moore (1976) note one consistent point of agreement: The rate of approach to asymptote appears to be positively related to reward magnitude.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reward magnitude effects as a function of within-day trial-by-trial analysis

Davis

Seago

1980

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, Campbell et a1. (1972) investigated possible satiation effects, Daly (1972) and McCain (1969) reported Singlevs. multiple-pellet effects, and McCain (1970) and McCain et a1.…”

Section: Texas Christian University Fort Worth Texas 76129mentioning

confidence: 99%