Abstract
An adjusting-amount procedure was used to measure discounting of reinforcer value by delay. Eight rats chose between a varying amount of immediate water and a fixed amount of water given after a delay. The amount of immediate water was systematically adjusted as a function of the rats' previous choices. This procedure was used to determine the indifference point at which each rat chose the immediate amount and the delayed amount with equal frequency. The amount of immediate water at this indifference point was used to estimate the value of the delayed amount of water. In Experiment 1, the effects of daily changes in the delay to the fixed reinforcer (100 microliters of water delivered after 0, 2, 4, 8, or 16 s) were tested. Under these conditions, the rats reached indifference points within the first 30 trials of each 60-trial session. In Experiment 2, the effects of water deprivation level on discounting of value by delay were assessed. Altering water deprivation level affected the speed of responding but did not affect delay discounting. In Experiment 3, the effects of varying the magnitude of the delayed water (100, 150, and 200 microliters) were tested. There was some tendency for the discounting function to be steeper for larger than for smaller reinforcers, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. In all three experiments, the obtained discount functions were well described by a hyperbolic function. These experiments demonstrate that the adjusting-amount procedure provides a useful tool for measuring the discounting of reinforcer value by delay.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (265.3 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Ainslie G. Specious reward: a behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control. Psychol Bull. 1975 Jul;82(4):463–496. doi: 10.1037/h0076860. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Charrier D., Thiébot M. H. Effects of psychotropic drugs on rat responding in an operant paradigm involving choice between delayed reinforcers. Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1996 May;54(1):149–157. doi: 10.1016/0091-3057(95)02114-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mazur J. E. Choice with probabilistic reinforcement: effects of delay and conditioned reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 1991 Jan;55(1):63–77. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1991.55-63. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mazur J. E. Conditioned reinforcement and choice with delayed and uncertain primary reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 Mar;63(2):139–150. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.63-139. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mazur J. E. Theories of probabilistic reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1989 Jan;51(1):87–99. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1989.51-87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Myerson J., Green L. Discounting of delayed rewards: Models of individual choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 Nov;64(3):263–276. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.64-263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]