Matching: Its acquisition and generalization

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

Volumn 82, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 143-159

  Crowley, Michael A ^a,b   Donahoe, John W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^b MOUNT HOLYOKE COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Changeover response; Concurrent schedule; Discrimination; Generalization; Key peck; Matching; Multiple schedule; Pigeon

Indexed keywords

EID: 8644282976     PISSN: 00225002     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2004.82-143     Document Type: Article

References (65)

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. (1979). Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 32, 269-281.
3. Baum, W. M. (1982). Choice, changeover, and travel. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 38, 35-49.
4. Baum, W. M., & Davison, M. (2004). Choice in a variable environment: Visit patterns in the dynamics of choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 81, 85-127.
5. Boelens, H., & Kop, P. F. M. (1983). Concurrent schedules: Spatial separation of response alternatives. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 40, 35-45.
6. Boelens, H., Kop, P. F., Nagel, A. I., & Slangen, J. I. (1986). Concurrent schedules: Maximization versus reinforcement of changeover behavior. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 38, 267-283.
7. Boelens, H., Kop, P. F., Nagel, A. I., & Slangen, J. I. (1987). Concurrent schedules: Effects of reinforcement rate and changeover delay on time allocation in a three-alternative procedure. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 39, 229-244.
8. Brownstein, A. J., & Pliskoff, S. S. (1968). Some effects of relative reinforcement rate and changeover delay in response-independent concurrent schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 11, 683-688.
9. Catania, A. G. (1962). Independence of concurrent responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 5, 175-184.
10. Catania, A. C. (1966). Concurrent operants. In W. K. Honig (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application (pp. 213-270). New York: Appleton-CenturyCrofts.
11. Catania, A. C., & Cutts, D. (1963). Experimental control of superstitious responding in humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 6, 203-208.
12. Crowley, M. A. (1979). The allocation of time to temporally defined behaviors: Responding during stimulus generalization. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 32, 191-197.
13. Crowley, M. A. (1981). The acquisition and generalization of matching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
14. Crozier, W. J. (1940). The theory of the visual threshold: I. Time and intensity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 26, 54-60.
15. Davison, M. (1996). Stimulus effects on behavior allocation in three-alternative choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 66, 149-168.
16. Davison, M., & Baum, W. M. (2003). Every reinforcer counts: Reinforcer magnitude and local preference. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 80, 95-129.
17. 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.
18. Davison, M., & McGarthy, D. (1988). The matching law: A research review. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Davison, M. C., & Tustin, R. D. (1978). The relation between the generalized matching law and signal-detection theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 29, 331-336.
20. de Villiers, P. (1977). Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. In W. K. Honig & J. E. R. Staddon (Eds.), Handbook of operant behavior (pp. 233-287). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
21. Dreyfus, L. R., DePorto, C. D., & Pasillo, S. A. (1993). Changeover contingencies and choice on concurrent schedules. Animal Learning & Behavior, 21, 203-213.
22. Dreyfus, L. R., Dorman, L. G., Fetterman, J. G., & Stubbs, D. A. (1982). An invariant relation between changing over and reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. 38, 327-338.
23. Ferster, C. B., & Skinner, B. F. (1957). Schedules of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
24. Findley, J. D. (1958). Preference and switching under concurrent schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 1, 123-144.
25. Fleshler, M., & Hoffman, H. S. (1962). A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 5, 529-530.
26. Hanna, F. S., Blackman, D. F., & Todorov, J. C. (1992). Stimulus effects on concurrent performance in transition. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 58, 335-347.
27. 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.
28. Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243-266.
29. Herrnstein, R. J., & Loveland, D. H. (1976). Matching in a network. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 26, 143-153.
30. Jenkins, H. M., & Sainsbury, R. S. (1969). The development of stimulus control through differential reinforcement. In N. J. Mackintosh & W. K. Honig (Eds.), Fundamental issues in associative learning (pp. 123-161).
31. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Dalhousie University Press. Keen, R., & Machado, A. (1999). How pigeons discriminate the relative frequency of events. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 72, 151-175.
32. Killeen, P. (1968). On the measurement of reinforcement frequency in the study of preference. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 11, 263-269.
33. Killeen, P. (1972). A yoked-chamber comparison of concurrent and multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 18, 13-22.
34. Logue, A. (1983). Signal detection and matching: Analyzing choice on concurrent variable-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 39, 107-127.
35. Lyons, J., & Klipec, W. D. (1971). Color mixing with Kodak Wratten filters. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 15, 232.
36. MacDonall, J. S. (1999). A local model of concurrent performance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 71, 57-74.
37. MacDonall, J. S. (2003). Reinforcing staying and switching while using a changeover delay. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 79, 219-232.
38. Machado, A. (1997). Increasing the variability of response sequences in pigeons by adjusting the frequency of switching between two keys. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 68, 1-25.
39. Machado, A., & Keen, R. (1999). The learning of response patterns in choice situations. Animal Learning & Behavior, 27, 251-271.
40. McDevitt, M. A., & Williams, B. A. (2003). Arousal, changeover responses, and preference in concurrent schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 80, 261-272.
41. Menlove, R. L. (1975). Local patterns of responding maintained by concurrent and multiple schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 23, 309-337.
42. Miller, J. T., Saunders, S. S., & Bourland, G. (1980). The role of stimulus disparity in concurrently available reinforcement schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 8, 635-641.
43. Myerson, J., & Miezin, F. M. (1980). The kinetics of choice: An operant systems analysis. Psychological Review, 87, 160-174.
44. Nevin, J. A., Jenkins, P., Whittaker, S., & Yarensky, P. (1982). Reinforcement contingencies and signal detection. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 65-79.
45. Pliskoff, S. S. (1971). Effects of symmetrical and asymmetrical changeover delays on concurrent performances. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 16, 249-256.
46. Pliskoff, S. S., & Green, D. (1972). Effects on concurrent performances of a stimulus correlated with reinforcer availability. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 17, 221-227.
47. Sainsbury, R. S. (1971). Effect of proximity of elements on the feature-positive effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 16, 315-325.
48. Shanan, T. A., & Lattal, K. A. (1998). On the functions of the changeover delay. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 69, 141-160.
49. Shull, R. L., & Pliskoff, S. S. (1967). Changeover delay and concurrent schedules: Some effects on relative performance measures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 10, 517-527.
50. Silberberg, A., & Fantino, E. (1970). Choice, rate of reinforcement, and the changeover delay. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 187-198.
51. Silberberg, A., & Williams, D. (1974). Choice behavior in discrete trials: A demonstration of the occurrence of a response strategy. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 315-322.
52. Silberberg, A., & Ziriax, J. M. (1982). The interchange-over time as a molecular dependent variable in concurrent schedules. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, & H. Rachlin (Eds.), Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol. 3. Matching and maximizing accounts of behavior (pp. 111-130). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
53. Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning necessary? Psychological Review, 57, 193-216.
54. Skinner, B. F. (1986). Some thoughts about the future. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 45, 229-235.
55. Stubbs, D. A., & Pliskoff, S. S. (1969). Concurrent responding with fixed relative rate of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 887-895.
56. Stubbs, D. A., Pliskoff, S. S., & Reid, H. M. (1977). Concurrent schedules: A quantitative relation between changeover behavior and its consequences. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 85-96.
57. Todorov, J. C., Oliveira Castro, J. M., Hanna, E. S., Bittencourt de Sa, M. C. N., & Barreto, M. Q. (1983). Choice, experience, and the generalized matching law. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 40, 99-111.
58. Vargas, J. (2000). Brief biography of B.F. Skinner. B. F. Skinner Foundation, http://www.bfskinner.org/bio.asp
59. Wearden, J. H. (1980). Undermatching on concurrent variable-interval schedules and the power law. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 33, 49-152.
60. Williams, B. A. (1988). Reinforcement, choice, and response strength. In R. C. Atkinson, R. J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey, & R. D. Luce (Eds.), Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology (2nd ed., pp. 167-244). New York: Wiley.
61. Williams, B. A. (1993). Molar versus local reinforcement probability as determinants of stimulus value. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 59, 163-172.
62. Williams, B. A. (1994). Reinforcement and choice. In N. J. Mackintosh (Ed.), Animal learning and cognition (pp. 81-108). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
63. Williams, B. A. (1996). Changeover behavior and preference in concurrent schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 513-526.
64. Williams, B. A., & Bell, M. C. (1996). Changeover behavior and preference in concurrent schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 65, 513-526.
65. Williams, B. A., & Bell, M. C. (1999). Preference after training with differential changeover delays. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 45-55.