Matching‐based Hedonic Scaling in the Pigeon

Hl, Miller

doi:10.1901/jeab.1976.26-335

Cited by 161 publications

(129 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

125

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Basic research should vary concentrations of sucrose and citric acid solutions parametrically to determine the shape of the functional relation as disparities in reinforcer quality vary. Investigations should extend to different types of reinforcers such as foods and sensory stimulation, with the possible development of hierarchies of momentum and reinforcer quality (see Miller, 1976, for the construction of hedonic scales for types of grain presented in concurrent reinforcement schedules). Applications of reinforcer quality to increase or decrease behavioral persistence should also be undertaken.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Reinforcer Quality on Behavioral Momentum: Coordinated Applied and Basic Research

Mace¹,

Mauro²,

Boyajian³

et al. 1997

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The high-probability (high-p) instructional sequence has been an effective treatment for noncompliance. However, treatment failures have also been reported. We hypothesized that the efficacy of the high-p treatment may be improved by using higher quality reinforcers for compliance to high-p instructions. The resistance of compliance to change was tested by varying reinforcer quality in two applied studies and a basic laboratory experiment. Experiment 1 tested the hypothesis that an increase in reinforcer quality for highp compliance will increase the effectiveness of the high-p treatment when it fails to increase compliance. Experiment 2 assessed the effects of reinforcer quality on resistance of compliance to change by presenting successive low-p requests following the high-p treatment. A basic laboratory study (Experiment 3) was conducted to further isolate the relation between reinforcer quality and behavioral momentum. Two different liquid reinforcers (sucrose and citric acid solutions) were presented in a two-component multiple variable-interval variable-interval schedule followed by a single extinction test session. Results of all three experiments showed a generally consistent relationship between reinforcer quality and behavioral momentum.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Reinforcer Quality on Behavioral Momentum: Coordinated Applied and Basic Research

Mace¹,

Mauro²,

Boyajian³

et al. 1997

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The parameters SA and Sn represent the subject's sensitivity to variations in reinforcer amount and delay, respectively. (For further examples of multivariate powerlaw transformations of the matching law, see Davison, 1982;Hamblin & Miller, 1977;Hunter & Davison, 1982;Miller, 1976;Schneider, 1973;Todorov, 1973. ) Other researchers (e.g., Green & Snyderman, 1980;Ito & Asaki, 1982) have also discarded a simple multiplicative relationship between amount and delay of reinforcement and have indicated that amount and delay of reinforcement are not linearly equivalent in their effects upon choice.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Independence of the amount and delay ratios in the generalized matching law

Rodríguez

Logue

1986

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eight pigeons chose between pairs of different sizes and delays of reinforcement scheduled according to nonindependent concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules. The results were best described by the generalized matching law, where the relative effects of amount and delay on preference are independent and multiplicative. Order of presentation of the conditions had a significant effect on preference that was best represented in the model by a modification of the bias parameter.Several researchers have investigated how reinforcer size and delay combine in order to determine preference between reinforcers (e.g

show abstract

“…Requests for reprints should be addressed to Leonard Green, Department of Psychology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130. (see Baum, 1979;de Villiers, 1977;Myers & Myers, 1977;Weardon & Burgess, 1982). The matching law has been extended to situations in which qualitatively different reinforcers are delivered from the two alternatives (Hollard & Davison, 1971;Miller, 1976), although an , 'economic, " or behavioral maximization, interpretation has also been proposed (Elsmore, Fletcher, Conrad, & Sodetz, 1980;Hursh & Natelson, 1981;Rachlin, Battalio, Kagel, & Green, 1981). In almost all of the research on matching, however, the responses required to produce reinforcement have been topographically the same on the alternatives (e.g., pecking one of two keys or pressing one of two levers).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Time and response matching with topographically different responses

Hanson

Green

1986

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four pigeons were exposed to several nonindependent concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. One schedule component required a keypecking response; the other component required a treadlepressing response. The birds matched the ratio of their behavior (as measured by responses and time) between the two topographically different responses to the ratio of reinforcement in those two components. When additional foods not contingent on a keypeck or treadlepress were then added, the birds matched time spent in the components to total rates of food delivered in those components; response matching was somewhat disrupted. The matching law, developed under concurrent variable-interval schedules requiring similar responses, can thus account for choice behavior involving topographically different responses.How organisms distribute their behavior among response alternatives is of considerable interest to psychologists, economists, and behavioral biologists. One of the more successful formulations of such choice behavior is the matching law (Herrnstein, 1961(Herrnstein, , 1970, which states that the ratio of responses, or the ratio of time, to two alternatives matches the ratio of the reinforcements obtained in those alternatives. That is, (1) where B1 and B2 are responses to or time on alternatives 1 and 2, respectively, and r, and r, are the reinforcements obtained from those alternatives.In his generalization of the matching equation, Baum (1974) noted that the logarithm of the ratio of behavior is a linear function of the logarithm of the ratio of reinforcement obtained:where a is the slope of the line and 10gb is the y intercept. When a subject matches, both a and b take on values of 1.0, and Equation 2 reduces to Equation 1. Undermatchingis represented by a slope less thanunity (a < 1); the subject overvalues the leaner schedule of reinforcement. Overmatching is represented by a slope greater than unity (a > 1); the subject overvalues the richer schedule of reinforcement. Bias, a systematic preference for one of the two alternatives, is represented in deviations of b from a value of one, seen as deviations in the y intercept from zero.Response and time matching have generally been supported by the results from studies of choice in which a variety of reinforcement schedules have been employedWe gratefully acknowledge the many contributions of the members of the Psychonomy Cabal in the running of these experiments. Requests for reprints should be addressed to

show abstract

Matching‐based Hedonic Scaling in the Pigeon

Cited by 161 publications

References 31 publications

Effects of Reinforcer Quality on Behavioral Momentum: Coordinated Applied and Basic Research

Effects of Reinforcer Quality on Behavioral Momentum: Coordinated Applied and Basic Research

Independence of the amount and delay ratios in the generalized matching law

Time and response matching with topographically different responses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About