Maternal nutrition and four-alternative choice

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

Volumn 87, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 51-62

  Davison, Michael ^a,b,c   Krägeloh, Christian U ^b   Fraser, Mhoyra ^b   Breier, Bernhard H ^b  

^a National Research Centre for Growth and Development   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^c UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Choice; Contingency discriminability; Generalized matching; Maternal nutrition; Nose poke; Rats

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; APPETITE; ARTICLE; BREEDING; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FOOD DEPRIVATION; LEARNING; MALE; MOTIVATION; ORIENTATION; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL EXPOSURE; RAT; REACTION TIME; REINFORCEMENT; WISTAR RAT;

ANIMALS; APPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; FOOD DEPRIVATION; GENERALIZATION, STIMULUS; MALE; MOTIVATION; ORIENTATION; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, ANIMAL; PRENATAL EXPOSURE DELAYED EFFECTS; PROBABILITY LEARNING; RATS; RATS, WISTAR; REACTION TIME; REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE;

EID: 33847058499     PISSN: 00225002     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2007.12-06     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Alsop, B., & Davison, M. (1991). Effects of varying stimulus disparity and the reinforcer ratio in concurrent-schedule and signal-detection procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 56, 67-80.
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. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Breier, B. H., Krägeloh, C. U., Thompson, N. M., Landon, J. G., Miles, J. L., Fraser, M., & Davison, M. (2005). Maternal nutrition during pregnancy influences learning and behavioural adaptation in offspring. Pediatric Research, 58, 1058.
7. Bronzino, J. D., Austin La France, R. J., Morgane, P. J., & Galler, J. R. (1996). Diet-induced alterations in the ontogeny of long-term potentiation. Hippocampus, 6, 109-17.
8. Davison, M., & Baum, W. M. (2000). Choice in a variable environment: Every reinforcer counts. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74, 1-24.
9. Davison, M., & Baum, W. M. (2003). Every reinforcer counts: Reinforcer magnitude and local preference. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 80, 95-129.
10. Davison, M. C., & Hunter, I. W. (1976). Performance on variable-interval schedules arranged singly and concurrently. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 25, 335-345.
11. Davison, M., & Jenkjns, P. E. (1985). Stimulus discriminability, contingency discriminability, and schedule performance. Animal Learning and Behavior, 13, 77-84.
12. Davison, M., & McCarthy, D. (1988). The Matching Law: A research review. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Davison, M., & Nevin, J. A. (1999). Stimuli, reinforcers, and behavior: An integration. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 439-482.
14. DeBassio, W. A., Kemper, T. L., Tonkiss, J., & Galler, J. R. (1996). Granule cell generation in the hippocampal dentate gyrus. Brain Research Bulletin, 41, 379-383.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. Landon, J., & Davison, M. (2001). Reinforcer-ratio variation and its effects on rate of adaptation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 75, 207-234.
18. Lobb, B., & Davison, M. C. (1975). Performance in concurrent interval schedules: A systematic replication. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 24, 191-197.
19. Long, J. M., & Kesner, R. P. (1998). Effects of hippocampal and parietal cortex lesions on memory for egocentric distance and spatial location information in rats. Behavioral Neuroscience, 112, 480-495.
20. Luce, R. D. (1959). Individual choice behavior: A theoretical analysis. New York: Wiley.
21. Miller, H. L. Jr., & Loveland, D. H. (1974). Matching when the number of response alternatives is large. Animal Learning & Behavior, 2, 106-110.
22. Miller, J. T., Saunders, S. S., & Bourland, G. (1980). The role of stimulus disparity in concurrently-available reinforcement schedules. Animal Learning & Behavior, 8, 635-641.
23. Murrell, P. R. (1995). Choice on three concurrent alternatives. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
24. Natapoff, A. (1970). How symmetry restricts symmetric choice. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 7, 444-465.
25. Pliskoff, S. S., & Brown, T. G. (1976). Matching with a trio of concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 25, 69-73.
26. Schneider, S. M., & Davison, M. (2005). Demarcated response sequences and generalised matching. Behavioural Processes, 70, 51-61.
27. Vickers, M. H., Breier, B. H., McCarthy, D., & Gluckman, P. D. (2003). Sedentary behaviour during postnatal life is determined by the prenatal environment and exacerbated by postnatal hypercaloric nutrition. American Journal of Physiology - Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, 285, R271-R273.
28. Woodall, S. M., Breier, B. H., Johnston, B. M., & Gluckman, P. D. (1996). A model of intrauterine growth retardation caused by chronic maternal undernutrition in the rat: Effects on the somatotrophic axis and postnatal growth. Journal of Endocrinology, 150, 231-242.