Synthesizing concurrent interval performances

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

Volumn 74, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 189-206

  MacDonall, James S ^a  

^a FORDHAM UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Contingency discrimination model; Generalized matching law; Lever press; Local model; Melioration; Random interval schedule; Rats

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; FEMALE; INSTRUMENTAL CONDITIONING; PHYSIOLOGY; RANDOMIZATION; RAT; REINFORCEMENT; SPRAGUE DAWLEY RAT;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; CONDITIONING, OPERANT; FEMALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; RANDOM ALLOCATION; RATS; RATS, SPRAGUE-DAWLEY; REINFORCEMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE;

EID: 0034279490     PISSN: 00225002     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2000.74-189     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Baum, W. M. (1974). On two types of deviations from the matching law: Bias and undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 231-242.
2. Baum, W. M., Schwendiman, J. W., & Bell, K. E. (1999). Choice, contingency discrimination, and foraging theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 355-373.
3. Davison, M. C., & Jenkins, P. E. (1985). Stimulus discriminability, contingency discriminability, and schedule performance. Animal Learning & Behavior, 13, 77-84.
4. Davison, M. C., & Jones, B. M. (1995). A quantitative analysis of extreme choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 64, 147-162.
5. Fleshier, M., & Hoffman, H. S. (1962). A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 5, 529-530.
6. Gibbon, J., Church, R. M., Fairhurst, S., & Kacelnik, A. (1988). Scalar expectancy theory and choice between delayed rewards. Psychological Review, 95, 102-114.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243-266.
10. Heyman, G. M. (1979). A Markov model description of changeover probabilities on concurrent variable-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 31, 41-51.
11. 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.
12. MacDonall, J. S. (1988). Concurrent variable-ratio schedules: Implications for the generalized matching law. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 50, 55-64.
13. MacDonall, J. S. (1998). Run length, visit duration, and reinforcers per visit in concurrent performance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 69, 275-293.
14. MacDonall, J. S. (1999). A local model of concurrent performance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 57-74.
15. Nevin, J. A. (1969). Interval reinforcement of choice behavior in discrete trials. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 875-885.
16. Nevin, J. A. (1979). Overall matching versus momentary maximizing: Nevin (1969) revisited. Journal of Expertmental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 5, 300-306.
17. Shimp, C. P. (1966). Probablistically reinforced choice behavior in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9, 443-455.
18. Silberberg, A., Hamilton, B., Ziriax, J. M., & Casey, J. (1978). The structure of choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 4, 368-398.
19. Vaughan, W., Jr. (1981). Melioration, matching, and maximizing. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 36, 141-149.