Context: A central concept

Behavioural Processes

Volumn 54, Issue 1-3, 2001, Pages 95-110

  Fantino, Edmund ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice; Context; Delay reduction theory; Foraging; Matching law

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIOR; BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE; COGNITION; CONDITIONING; CONFERENCE PAPER; ENVIRONMENT; HUMAN; NONHUMAN; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGY; REINFORCEMENT; REWARD; ROLE PLAYING; STRESS;

EID: 0035799608     PISSN: 03766357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0376-6357(01)00152-8     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (39)

1. Auge R.J. Context, observing behavior, and conditioned reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 22:1974;525-533.
2. Autor, S.M., 1960. The strength of conditioned reinforcers as a function of frequency and probability of reinforcement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.
3. Autor S.M. The strength of conditioned reinforcers as a function of frequency and probability of reinforcement. Hendry D.P. Conditioned Reinforcement. 1969;Dorsey Press, Homewood, IL.
4. Birnbaum M.H., Veit C.T. Scale convergence as a criterion for rescaling: information integration with difference, ratio, and averaging tasks. Percep. Psychophys. 15:1974;7-15.
5. Brown P.L., Jenkins H.M. Auto-shaping of the pigeon's key-peck. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 11:1968;1-8.
6. Collier, G., 1977. Optimal feeding strategies in animals: laboratory simulation. Paper presented at the meetings of the Eastern Psychological Association, Boston.
7. Collier, G.H., Kaufman, L.W., 1976. The patchy environment: a laboratory simulation. Paper presented at the meetings of the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis.
8. Davison M.C., Temple W. Preference for fixed-interval schedules: an alternative model. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 20:1973;393-403.
9. de Villiers P. Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. Honig W.K., Staddon J.E.R. Handbook of Operant Behavior. 1977;Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
10. Duncan B., Fantino E. Choice for periodic schedules of reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 14:1970;73-86.
11. Fantino E. Choice and rate of reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 12:1969;723-730.
12. Fantino E. Conditioned reinforcement: Choice and information. Honig W.K., Staddon J.E.R. Handbook of Operant Behavior. 1977;Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
13. Fantino E. Effect of initial-link length on responding in terminal link. Behav. Anal. Lett. 2:1982;65-70.
14. Fantino, E., 1984. In: J.A. Nevin and P.N.Hineline (Eds.), Reviewers' comments on Timberlake's behavior regulation and learned performance. J. Exp. Anal. Behav., 41: 376-382.
15. Fantino, E., 1997. Delay reduction. Invited preeminent tutorial. Society for the Quantitative Analyses of Behavior, Chicago.
16. Fantino, E., 2001. Delay-reduction theory: the case for temporal context. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen., in press.
17. Fantino E., Abarca N. Choice, optimal foraging, and the delay-reduction hypothesis. Behav. Brain Sci. 8:1985;315-362.
18. Fantino E., Goldshmidt J.N. Differences, not ratios, control choice in an experimental analog to foraging. Psychol. Sci. 11:2000;229-233.
19. Fantino E., Logan C.A. The Experimental Analysis of Behavior: A Biological Perspective. 1979;Freeman, San Francisco.
20. Gamzu E., Schwartz B. The maintenance of key pecking by stimulus-contingent and response-independent food presentation. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 19:1973;65-72.
21. Gibbon J. Scalar expectancy theory and Weber's law in animal timing. Psychol. Rev. 84:1977;279-325.
22. Gibbon J., Church R.M., Fairhurst S., Kacelnik A. Scalar expectancy theory and choice between delayed rewards. Psychol. Rev. 95:1988;102-114.
23. Grace, R.C, and Savastano, H.I., in press. Temporal context and conditioned reinforcement value. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen., in press.
24. Hanson J., Green L. Foraging decisions: prey choice by pigeons. Anim. Behav. 37:1989;429-443.
25. Hearst E., Jenkins H.M. Sign-Tracking: The Stimulus-reinforcer Relation and Directed Action. 1974;Psychonomic Society, Austin, TX.
26. Herrnstein R.J. Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 4:1961;267-272.
27. Herrnstein R.J. Secondary reinforcement and rate of primary reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 7:1964;27-36.
28. Herrnstein R.J. On the law of effect. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 13:1970;243-266.
29. Ito M., Fantino E. Choice, foraging, and reinforcer duration. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 46:1986;93-103.
30. Luce R.D. Individual Choice Behavior. 1959;Wiley, New York.
31. MacEwen D. The effects of terminal-link fixed-interval and variable-interval schedules on responding under concurrent chained schedules. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 18:1972;253-261.
32. Mellers B.A., Davis D.M., Birnbaum M.H. Weight of evidence supports one operation for 'ratios' and 'differences' of heaviness. J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percep. Perform. 10:1984;216-230.
33. Rescorla R.A. Probability of shock in the presence and absence of CS in fear conditioning. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 66:1968;1-5.
34. Restle F., Greeno J.G. Introduction to Mathematical Psychology. 1970;Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
35. Savastano H.I., Fantino E. Differences in delay, not ratios, control choice in concurrent chains. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 66:1996;97-116.
36. Squires N., Fantino E. A model for choice in simple concurrent and concurrent-chains schedules. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 15:1971;27-38.
37. Terrace H.S., Gibbon J., Farrell L., Baldock M.D. Temporal factors influencing the acquisition and maintenance of an autoshaped keypeck. Anim. Learn. Behav. 3:1975;53-62.
38. Tolman E.C. The determiners of behavior at a choice point. Psychol. Rev. 45:1938;1-41.
39. Wyckoff L.B. Jr. The role of observing responses in discrimination learning, Part 1. Psychol. Rev. 59:1952;431-442.