Comparing the generalized matching law and contingency discriminability model as accounts of concurrent schedule performance using residual meta-analysis

Behavioural Processes

Volumn 78, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 224-230

  Sutton, Nicholas P ^a   Grace, Randolph C ^a   McLean, Anthony P ^a   Baum, William M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice; Concurrent schedules; Contingency discriminability model; Generalized matching law; Key peck; Meta analysis; Pigeons

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; META-ANALYSIS; MODELING; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT;

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NONHUMAN; PIGEON; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; REINFORCEMENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ANIMALS; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); GENERALIZATION (PSYCHOLOGY); MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; REACTION TIME; REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE;

COLUMBA;

EID: 42249104868     PISSN: 03766357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2008.02.012     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Alsop B., and Elliffe D. Concurrent schedule performance: effects of relative and overall reinforcement rate. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 49 (1988) 21-36
2. Baum, W.M., 1972. Unpublished data, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
3. Baum W.M. Choice in free-ranging wild pigeons. Science 185 (1974) 78-79
4. Baum W.M. On two types of deviation from the matching law: bias and undermatching. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 22 (1974) 231-242
5. Baum W.M. Time-based and count-based measurement of preference. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 26 (1976) 27-35
6. Baum W.M. Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 32 (1979) 269-281
7. Baum W.M. From molecular to molar: a paradigm shift in behavior analysis. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 78 (2002) 95-116
8. Baum W.M., and Rachlin H.C. Choice as time allocation. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 12 (1969) 861-874
9. Baum W.M., Schwendiman J.W., and Bell K.E. Choice, contingency discrimination, and foraging theory. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 71 (1999) 355-373
10. Belke T.W., and Beliveau J. The generalized matching law describes choice on concurrent variable-interval schedules of wheel-running reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 75 (2001) 299-310
11. Catania A.C. Concurrent performances: reinforcement interaction and response independence. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 6 (1963) 253-263
12. Cutting J.E. Accuracy, scope, and flexibility of models. J. Math. Psychol. 44 (2000) 3-19
13. Dallery J., McDowell J.J., and Lancaster J.S. Falsification of matching theory's account of single-alternative responding: Herrnstein's k varies with sucrose concentration. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 9 (2000) 23-43
14. Davison M. Bias and sensitivity to reinforcement in a concurrent-chain schedule. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 40 (1983) 15-34
15. Davison M. Concurrent schedules: effects of time- and response-allocation constraints. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 55 (1991) 189-200
16. Davison M., and Hogsden I. Concurrent variable-interval schedule performance: fixed versus mixed reinforcer durations. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 41 (1984) 169-182
17. Davison M., and Jenkins P.E. Stimulus discriminability, contingency discriminability, and schedule performance. Anim. Learn. Behav. 13 (1985) 77-84
18. Davison M., and Jones B.M. A quantitative analysis of extreme choice. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 64 (1995) 147-162
19. Davison M., and Kerr A. Sensitivity of time allocation to an overall reinforcer rate feedback function in concurrent interval schedules. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 51 (1989) 215-231
20. Davison M., and McCarthy D. Effects of the discriminability of alternatives in three-alternative concurrent-schedule performance. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 61 (1994) 45-63
21. Elliffe D., and Alsop B. Concurrent choice: effects of overall reinforcer rate and the temporal distribution of reinforcers. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 65 (1996) 445-463
22. Findley J.D. Preference and switching under concurrent scheduling. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 1 (1958) 123-144
23. Grace R.C. A contextual model of concurrent-chains choice. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 61 (1994) 113-129
24. Grace, R.C., McLean, A.P. 2008. Unpublished data, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.
25. Graft D.A., Lea S.E.G., and Whitworth T.L. The matching law in and within groups of rats. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 27 (1977) 183-194
26. Green L., and Myerson J. A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psychol. Bull. 130 (2004) 769-792
27. Herrnstein R.J. On the law of effect. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 13 (1970) 243-266
28. Leigland S.M. Deviations from matching as a measure of preference for alternatives in pigeons. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 32 (1979) 1-13
29. Lobb B., and Davison M.C. Performance in concurrent interval schedules: a systematic replication. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 24 (1975) 191-197
30. Mazur J.E. Hyperbolic value addition and general models of animal choice. Psychol. Rev. 108 (2001) 96-112
31. McLean A.P. The sampling distribution of k. Behav. Process. 72 (2006) 300-308
32. McLean A.P., and Blampied N.M. Sensitivity to relative reinforcement rate in concurrent schedules: Independence from relative and absolute reinforcer duration. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 75 (2001) 25-42
33. McSweeney, F.K., 1975. Matching and contrast on several concurrent treadle-press schedules. J. Exp. Anal. Behav., 23, 193-198 (data sourced from W.M. Baum at the University of California, Davis, 2006).
34. Nevin J.A. Quantitative analysis. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 42 (1984) 421-434
35. Pitt M.A., Myung I.J., and Zhang S. Toward a method of selecting among computational models of cognition. Psychol. Rev. 109 (2002) 472-491
36. Pliskoff S.S., Cicerone R., and Nelson T.D. Local response-rate constancy on concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 29 (1978) 431-446
37. Rosenthal R., and DiMatteo M.R. Meta analysis: recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 52 (2001) 59-82
38. Tryon W.W. Digital filters in behavioral research. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 39 (1983) 185-190