Choice in a variable environment: Every reinforcer counts

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

Volumn 74, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 1-24

  Davison, Michael ^a   Baum, William M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice; Concurrent schedules; Contingency discriminability; Environmental variability; Generalized matching; Key peck; Pigeons

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; ENVIRONMENT; PHYSIOLOGY; PIGEONS AND DOVES; REINFORCEMENT;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COLUMBIDAE; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; ENVIRONMENT; REINFORCEMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE;

EID: 0034230811     PISSN: 00225002     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-1     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Alsop, B. (1991). Behavioral models of signal detection and detection models of choice. In M. L. Commons, J. A. Nevin, & M. C. Davison (Eds.), Signal detection: Mechanisms, models, and applications (pp. 39-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Alsop, B., & Elliffe, D. (1988). Concurrent-schedule performance: Effects of relative and overall reinforcer rate. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 49, 21-36.
3. Bailey, J. T., & Mazur, J. E. (1990). Choice behavior in transition: Development of preference for the higher probability of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 409-422.
4. Baum, W. M. (1974). 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. (1979). Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32, 269-281.
6. Baum, W. M., Schwendiman, J. W., & Bell, K. E. (1999). Choice relations in the extreme: Matching, contingency discrimination, and foraging theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 355-373.
7. Belke, T. W., & Heyman, G. M. (1994). Increasing and signaling background reinforcement: Effect on the foreground response-reinforcer relation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 61, 65-81.
8. Bernstein, C., Kacelnik, A., & Krebs, J. R. (1988). Individual decisions and the distribution of predators in a patchy environment. Journal of Animal Ecology, 57, 1007-1026.
9. Brunner, D., Kacelnik, A., & Gibbon, J. (1996). Memory for inter-reinforcement interval variability and patch departure decisions in the starling, Sternus vulgaris. Animal Behaviour, 51, 1025-1045.
10. Davis, D. G. S., Staddon, J. E. R., Machado, A., & Palmer, R. G. (1993). The process of recurrent choice. Psychological Review, 100, 320-341.
11. Davison, M. (1991). Stimulus discriminability, contingency discriminability, and stimulus generalization. In M. L. Commons, J. A. Nevin, & M. C. Davison (Eds.), Signal detection: Mechanisms, models, and applications (pp. 57-78). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Davison, M. C., & Hunter, I. W. (1978). Concurrent schedules: Undermatching and control by previous experimental conditions. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32, 233-244.
13. Davison, M., & Jenkins, P. E. (1985). Stimulus discriminability, contingency discriminability, and schedule performance. Animal Learning & Behavior, 13, 77-84.
14. Davison, M., & Jones, B. M. (1995). A quantitative analysis of extreme choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 147-162.
15. Davison, M., & Jones, B. M. (1998). Performance on concurrent variable-interval extinction schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 69, 49-57.
16. Davison, M., & Nevin, J. A. (1999). Stimuli, reinforcers, and behavior: An integration. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 439-482.
17. Elliffe, D., & Alsop, B. (1996). Concurrent choice: Effects of overall reinforcer rate and the temporal distribution of reinforcers. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 445-463.
18. Green, R. F. (1980). Bayesian birds: A simple example of Oaten's stochastic model of optimal foraging. Theoretical Population Biology, 18, 244-256.
19. Green, R. F. (1984). Stopping rules for optimal foragers. The American Naturalist, 123, 30-40.
20. 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.
21. Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243-266.
22. Hunter, I. W. (1979). Static and dynamic models of concurrent variable-interval schedule performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Auckland.
23. Hunter, I., & Davison, M. (1985). Determination of a behavioral transfer function: White-noise analysis of session-to-session response-ratio dynamics on concurrent VI VI schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 43, 43-59.
24. Killeen, P. R. (1978). Stability criteria. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 17-25.
25. Krebs, J. R., & Inman, A. J. (1992). Learning and foraging: Individuals, groups, and populations. The American Naturalist, 140, S63-S84.
26. Lobb, B., & Davison, M. C. (1975). Performance in concurrent interval schedules: A systematic replication. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 24, 191-197.
27. Mazur, J. E. (1992). Choice behavior in transition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 18, 364-378.
28. Mazur, J. E. (1996). Past experience, recency, and spontaneous recovery in choice behavior. Animal Learning & Behavior, 24, 1-10.
29. Mazur, J. E., & Ratti, T. A. (1991). Choice behavior in transition: Development of preference in a free-operant procedure. Animal Learning & Behavior, 19, 241-248.
30. Miller, J. T., Saunders, S., & Bourland, G. (1980). The role of stimulus disparity in concurrently available reinforcement schedules. Animal Learning & Behavior, 8, 635-641.
31. Schofield, G., & Davison, M. (1997). Nonstable concurrent choice in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 68, 219-232.
32. Taylor, R., & Davison, M. (1983). Sensitivity to reinforcement in concurrent arithmetic and exponential schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39, 191-198.