Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis logoLink to Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
. 1998 Spring;31(1):43–63. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1998.31-43

Response allocation to concurrent fixed-ratio reinforcement schedules with work requirements by adults with mental retardation and typical preschool children.

A J Cuvo 1, L J Lerch 1, D A Leurquin 1, T J Gaffaney 1, R L Poppen 1
PMCID: PMC1284098  PMID: 9532750

Abstract

The present experiments examined the effect of work requirements in combination with reinforcement schedule on the choice behavior of adults with mental retardation and preschool children. The work requirements of age-appropriate tasks (i.e., sorting silverware, jumping hurdles, tossing beanbags) were manipulated. Participants were presented with their choice of two response options for each trial that varied simultaneously on both work requirement and reinforcement schedule. Results showed that when responding to both choices occurred on the same reinforcement schedule, participants allocated most of their responses to the option with the easier work requirement. When the response option requiring less work was on a leaner reinforcement schedule, most participants shifted their choice to exert more work. There were individual differences across participants regarding their pattern of responding and when they switched from the lesser to the greater work requirement. Data showed that participants' responding was largely controlled by the reinforcement received for responding to each level of work. Various conceptualizations regarding the effects of work requirements on choice behavior are discussed.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (232.7 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. AZRIN N. H. Effects of punishment intensity during variable-interval reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1960 Apr;3:123–142. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1960.3-123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Adair E. R., Wright B. A. Behavioral thermoregulation in the squirrel monkey when response effort is varied. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1976 Feb;90(2):179–184. doi: 10.1037/h0077197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Alling K., Poling A. The effects of differing response-force requirements on fixed-ratio responding of rats. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 May;63(3):331–346. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.63-331. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. CHUNG S. H. EFFECTS OF EFFORT ON RESPONSE RATE. J Exp Anal Behav. 1965 Jan;8:1–7. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1965.8-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Eisenberger R. Learned industriousness. Psychol Rev. 1992 Apr;99(2):248–267. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.99.2.248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Green L., Snyderman M. Choice between rewards differing in amount and delay: Toward a choice model of self control. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Sep;34(2):135–147. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.34-135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. HERRNSTEIN R. J. Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1961 Jul;4:267–272. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1961.4-267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Herrnstein R. J., Loveland D. H. Maximizing and matching on concurrent ratio schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Jul;24(1):107–116. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.24-107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Herrnstein R. J. On the law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Mar;13(2):243–266. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.13-243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hunter I., Davison M. Independence of response force and reinforcement rate on concurrent variable-interval schedule performance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Mar;37(2):183–197. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Mace F. C., McCurdy B., Quigley E. A. A collateral effect of reward predicted by matching theory. J Appl Behav Anal. 1990 Summer;23(2):197–205. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1990.23-197. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Neef N. A., Shade D., Miller M. S. Assessing influential dimensions of reinforcers on choice in students with serious emotional disturbance. J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Winter;27(4):575–583. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-575. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Pierce W. D., Epling W. F. The applied importance of research on the matching law. J Appl Behav Anal. 1995 Summer;28(2):237–241. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1995.28-237. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Schroeder S. R. Parametric effects of reinforcement frequency, amount of reinforcement, and required response force on sheltered workshop behavior. J Appl Behav Anal. 1972 Winter;5(4):431–441. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1972.5-431. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis are provided here courtesy of Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior

RESOURCES