|
| International Paper Session - Choice II |
| Monday, May 28, 2007 |
| 4:00 PM–4:50 PM |
| Madeleine AB |
| Area: EAB |
| Chair: Jade Hill (Jacksonville State University) |
| |
| Unsignalled Delays in Concurrent Schedules. |
| Domain: Basic Research |
| BRENT L. ALSOP (University of Otago, NZ) |
| |
| Abstract: Five pigeons were trained using concurrent VI VI schedules with and without unsignalled delays of reinforcement. Both procedures produced undermatching. Performance with the unsignalled delay procedure was more orderly if the response temporally close to the reinforcer was used to allocate the reinforcers across the alternatives. These data are discussed in relation to the Davison and Jenkins (1985) model of choice. |
| |
| Effects of Variable Ratio Schedules for Reinforcing Changing Over on Behavioral Sensitivity to Reinforcer Distribution. |
| Domain: Basic Research |
| JAMES S. MACDONALL (Fordham University) |
| |
| Abstract: In concurrent choice procedures changeover delays (COD) may increase behavioral sensitivity to the distribution of reinforcers. Herrnstein (1961) suggested the COD, compared to no COD, produced response distributions close to perfect matching because the COD reduced the rate of switching alternatives. In order to begin to assess this idea, the rate of changing alternatives was varied by reinforcing switching on a variable ratio schedule (VR); A VR 8 would reinforce every 8 changes, on average, regardless of how much time passed since the last reinforcer. Four rats were exposed to a concurrent random interval (RI) 37.5 s RI 150 s schedule in which the schedules for staying at each alternative were constant across conditions as the VR schedules for reinforcing changing alternatives changed from VR 1 to VR 64. The RI schedules only arranged reinforcers for staying at an alternative, they never arranged reinforcer for changing alternatives, as in standard concurrent schedules. Each changeover response switched alternatives. We found the response sensitivity increased as the VR requirement for changing alternatives increased. |
| |
|
| |