Incentive Theory: Iv. Magnitude of Reward

We model behavioral allocation on concurrent chains in which the initial links are independent variableinterval schedules. We also quantify the relationship between behavior during the initial links and the probability of entering a terminal link. The behavior that maximizes overall reinforcement rate is then considered and compared with published experimental data. Although all the trends in the data are predicted by rate maximization, there are considerable deviations from the predictions of rate maximization when reward magnitudes are unequal. We argue from our results that optimal allocation on concurrent chains, and prey choice as used in the theory of optimal diets, are distinct concepts. We show that the maximization of overall rate can lead to apparent violations of stochastic transitivity.

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Examples that fall into the first category are the delay-reduction hypothesis of Fantino (1969,1977,1981) and the incentive models of Killeen (1982Killeen ( , 1985. Models based on optimization have been proposed by Staddon (1983) and Fantino and Abarca (1985).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Maximization of Overall Reinforcement Rate on Concurrent Chains

Houston

Sumida

McNamara

1987

“…The function u(v) is typically concave (e.g., Killeen, 1985): 16 pellets are less than twice as reinforcing as 8 pellets. Equation 7 is a multiplicative, not additive model, however, therefore no magnitude effect is predicted-or found .…”

Section: Rat Economicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The arithmetic of discounting

Killeen

2014

Self Cite

Most current models of delay discounting multiply the nominal value of a good whose receipt is delayed, by a discount factor that is some function of that delay. This article reviews the logic of a theory that discounts the utility of delayed goods by adding the utility of the good to the disutility of the delay. In limiting cases it approaches other familiar models, such as hyperbolic discounting. In nonlimit cases it makes different predictions, generally requiring, inter alia, a magnitude effect when the value of goods is varied. A different theory is proposed for conditioning experiments. In it utility is computed as the average reinforcing strength of the stimuli that signal the delay. Both theories are extended to experiments in which degree of preference is measured, rather than adjustment to iso‐utility values.

“…Satiation and warm-up effects can be substantial, and the mechanics of behavior provides a framework within which to derive models of them. Both the presentation of incentives and their removal often affect animals only after a lag; thus, we have warm-up effects when sessions start, cool-down or extinction effects when incentives cease, and responding through satiation in well-practiced The second, third, and nth instants of consumption are not contiguous with the response that brought them about; they are separated from it by n -1 prior instants of consumption (Killeen, 1985) that block their effectiveness. The last instants of a long-duration reward constitute a delayed reward.…”

Section: Economic Translationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economics, Ecologics, and Mechanics: The Dynamics of Responding Under Conditions of Varying Motivation

Killeen

1995

Self Cite

The mechanics of behavior developed by Killeen (1994) is extended to deal with deprivation and satiation and with recovery of arousal at the beginning of sessions. The extended theory is validated against satiation curves and within-session changes in response rates. Anornalies, such as (a) the positive correlation between magnitude of an incentive and response rates in some contexts and a negative correlation in other contexts and (b) the greater prominence of incentive effects when magnitude is varied within the session rather than between sessions, are explained in terms of the basic interplay of drive and incentive motivation. The models are applied to data from closed economies in which changes of satiation levels play a key role in determining the changes in behavior. Relaxation of various assumptions leads to closed-form models for response rates and demand functions in these contexts, ones that show reasonable accord with the data and reinforce arguments for unit price as a controlling variable. The central role of deprivation level in this treatment distinguishes it from economic models. It is argued that traditional experiments should be redesigned to reveal basic principles, that ecologic experiments should be redesigned to test the applicability of those principles in more natural contexts, and that behavioral economics should consist of the applications of these principles to economic contexts, not the adoption of economic models as alternatives to behavioral analysis. goods, and the ecologic organism behaves to minimize deviations from optimal setpoints in its parameter space. Mechanics focuses on the efficient rather than the final causes of behavior, and provides a set of formal causes-a set of mathematical models-that expands simple assertions of causal agency into more precise functional relations between variables. The mechanical organism is not behaving to optimize anything; incitement makes it active, satiation decreases its excitability, and co-occurrence of particular responses with incentives increases the probability of those responses. The primary goal of this paper is to develop the mechanics to the point at which it is applicable to the experimental contexts that are favored by economic and ecologic theorists.