Differences, not ratios, control choice in an experimental analogue to foraging

Psychological Science

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 229-233

  Fantino, Edmund ^a   Goldshmidt, Jay N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; APPETITE; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DIFFERENTIAL THRESHOLD; MOTIVATION; PIGEONS AND DOVES; REINFORCEMENT;

ANIMALS; APPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COLUMBIDAE; DIFFERENTIAL THRESHOLD; MOTIVATION; REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE;

EID: 0034189622     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.00246     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Birnbaum, M.H., & Veit, C.T. (1974). Scale convergence as a criterion for rescaling: Information integration with difference, ratio, and averaging tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 15, 7-15.
2. Charnov, E.L. (1976). Optimal foraging: The marginal value theorem. Theoretical Population Biology, 9, 129-136.
3. Collier, G.H., & Rovee-Collier, C.K. (1981). A comparative analysis of optimal foraging behavior: Laboratory simulations. In A.C. Kamil & T.D. Sargent (Eds.), Foraging behavior: Ecological, ethological, and psychological approaches (pp. 39-76). New York: Garland STPM Press.
4. Duncan, B., & Fantino, E. (1970). Choice for periodic schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 14, 73-86.
5. Fantino, E., & Abarca, N. (1985). Choice, optimal foraging, and the delay-reduction hypothesis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8, 315-330.
6. Gibbon, J. (1977). Scalar expectancy theory and Weber's law in animal timing. Psychological Review, 84, 279-325.
7. Gibbon, J., Church, R.M., Fairhurst, S., & Kacelnik, A. (1988). Scalar expectancy theory and choice between delayed rewards. Psychological Review, 95, 102-114.
8. Grace, R.C. (1994). A contextual model of concurrent-chains choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 61, 113-129.
9. Hanson, J., & Green, L. (1989). Foraging decisions: Prey choice by pigeons. Animal Behaviour, 37, 429-443.
10. 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.
11. Lea, S.E.G. (1979). Foraging and reinforcement schedules in the pigeon: Optimal and non-optimal aspects of choice. Animal Behaviour, 27, 875-886.
12. Luce, R.D. (1959). Individual choice behavior. New York: Wiley.
13. Mellers, B.A., Davis, D.M., & Birnbaum, M.H. (1984). Weight of evidence supports one operation for "ratios" and "differences" of heaviness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 216-230.
14. Restle, F., & Greeno, J.G. (1970). Introduction to mathematical psychology. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15. Savastano, H.I., & Fantino, E. (1996). Outcome differences, not ratios, control choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 66, 97-116.
16. Squires, N., & Fantino, E. (1971). A model for choice in simple concurrent and concurrent-chains schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 15, 27-38.
17. Tolman, E.C. (1938). The determiners of behavior at a choice point. Psychological Review, 45, 1-41.