Optimality and concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

Volumn 71, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 75-89

  Baum, William M ^a   Aparicio, Carlos F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Concurrent schedules; Concurrent variable interval variable ratio; Foraging theory; Lever press; Optimality; Per visit analysis; Rats

Indexed keywords

EID: 0004383635     PISSN: 00225002     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1999.71-75     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Aparicio, C. F., & Baum, W. M. (1997). Comparing locomotion with lever-press travel in an operant simulation of foraging. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 68, 177-192.
2. Baum, W. M. (1973). The correlation-based law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 20, 137-153.
3. Baum, W. M. (1974a). Chained concurrent schedules: Reinforcement as situation transition. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 91-101.
4. Baum, W. M. (1974b). On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 231-242.
5. Baum, W. M. (1976). Time-based and count-based measurement of preference. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 26, 27-35.
6. Baum, W. M. (1979). Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32, 269-281.
7. Baum, W. M. (1981). Optimization and the matching law as accounts of instrumental behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 36, 387-403.
8. Baum, W. M. (1982). Choice, changeover, and travel. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 38, 35-49.
9. Baum, W. M., & Rachlin, H. C. (1969). Choice as time allocation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 861-874.
10. Boelens, H., & Kop, P. F. M. (1983). Concurrent schedules: Spatial separation of response alternatives. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 40, 35-45.
11. Davison, M. (1991). Choice, changeover, and travel: A quantitative model. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 55, 47-61.
12. Davison, M. C. (1992). Choice between repleting/depleting patches: A concurrent-schedule procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 58, 445-469.
13. Davison, M. C., & Kerr, A. (1989). Sensitivity of time allocation to an overall reinforcer rate feedback function in concurrent interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 51, 215-231.
14. Davison, M., & McCarthy, D. (1988). The matching law: A research review. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Gray, R. D. (1994). Sparrows, matching, and the ideal free distribution: Can biological and psychological approaches be synthesized? Animal Behaviour, 48, 411-423.
16. Green, L., Rachlin, H., & Hanson, J. (1983). Matching and maximizing with concurrent ratio-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 40, 217-224.
17. Herrnstein, R. J. (1961). Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 267-272.
18. Herrnstein, R. J. (1990). Behavior, reinforcement and utility. Psychological Science, 1, 217-224.
19. Herrnstein, R. J., & Heyman, G. M. (1979). Is matching compatible with reinforcement maximization on concurrent variable interval, variable ratio? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 31, 209-223.
20. Herrnstein, R. J., & Vaughan, W., Jr. (1980). Melioration and behavioral allocation. In J. E. R. Staddon (Ed.), Limits to action: The allocation of individual behavior (pp. 143-176). New York: Academic Press.
21. Heyman, G. M., & Herrnstein, R. J. (1986). More on concurrent interval-ratio schedules: A replication and review. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 46, 331-351.
22. Heyman, G. M., & Tanz, L. (1995). How to teach a pigeon to maximize overall reinforcement rate. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 277-297.
23. Hinson, J. M., & Staddon, J. E. R. (1983). Matching, maximizing, and hill-climbing. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 40, 321-331.
24. Houston, A. I., & McNamara, J. (1981). How to maximize reward rate on two variable-interval paradigms. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 35, 367-396.
25. Houston, A. I., McNamara, J. M., & Sumida, B. H. (1987). Relative allocation on concurrent schedules can depend on schedule parameters when behavioral parameters are constant. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 47, 127-131.
26. Mazur, J. E. (1981). Optimization theory fails to predict preformance of pigeons in a two-response situation. Science, 214, 823-825.
27. Mazur, J. E., & Vaughan, W., Jr. (1987). Molar optimization versus delayed reinforcement as explanations of choice between fixed-ratio and progressive-ratio schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 48, 251-261.
28. Rachlin, H. (1978). A molar theory of reinforcement schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 30, 345-360.
29. Rachlin, H., Green, L., & Tormey, B. (1988). Is there a decisive test between matching and maximizing? Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50, 113-123.
30. Sakagami, T., Hursh, S. R., Christensen, J., & Silberberg, A. (1989). Income maximizing in concurrent interval-ratio schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 52, 41-46.
31. Shettleworth, S. J. (1988). Foraging as operant behavior and operant behavior as foraging: What have we learned? Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 22, 1-49.
32. Shimp, C. P. (1969). Optimal behavior in free-operant experiments. Psychological Review, 76, 97-112.
33. Shurtleff, D., & Silberberg, A. (1990). Income maximizing on concurrent ratio-interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 273-284.
34. Silberberg, A., & Fantino, E. (1970). Choice, rate of reinforcement, and the changeover delay. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 187-197.
35. Silberberg, A., Thomas, J. R., & Berendzen, N. (1991). Human choice on concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 575-584.
36. Staddon, J. E. R. (1980). Optimality analyses of operant behavior and their relation to optimal foraging. In J. E. R. Staddon (Ed.), Limits to action: The allocation of individual behavior (pp. 101-141). New York: Academic Press.
37. Staddon, J. E. R., & Horner, J. M. (1989). Stochastic choice models: A comparison between Bush-Mosteller and a source-independent reward-following model. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 52, 57-64.
38. Stephens, D. W., & Krebs, J. R. (1986). Foraging theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
39. Vaughan, W., Jr. (1981). Melioration, matching, and maximization. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 36, 141-149.
40. Vaughan, W., Jr., & Herrnstein, R. J. (1987). Stability, melioration, and natural selection. In L. Green & J. H. Kagel (Eds.), Advances in behavioral economics (Vol. 1, pp. 185-215). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
41. Wearden, J. H., & Burgess, I. S. (1982). Matching since Baum (1979). Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 38, 339-348.
42. Williams, B. A. (1988). Reinforcement, choice, and response strength. In R. C. Atkinson, R. J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey, & R. D. Luce (Eds.), Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology: Learning and cognition (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 167-244). New York: Wiley.
43. Ziriax, J. M., & Silberberg, A. (1984). Concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules can provide only weak evidence for matching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 41, 83-100.