Abstract
Two experiments, using rats as subjects, investigated the effect of different reinforcer amounts and energy budgets on choice between constant and variable alternatives under a closed economy. Rats were housed in the chamber and were exposed to a modified concurrent-chains schedule in which the choice phase was separated from a rest phase during which the rats could engage in other activities. In the choice phase, a single variable-interval schedule arranged entry into one of two equal terminal links (fixed-interval schedules). The constant terminal link ended with the delivery of a fixed number of food pellets (two or three, depending on the condition), whereas the variable terminal link ended with a variable number of food pellets (means of two or three, depending on the condition). Energy budget was defined as positive when body weights were over 90% of free-feeding weights, and as negative when they were under 80% of free-feeding weights. The different body weights were produced by varying the duration of the equal terminal-link schedules within daily 3-hr sessions. In Experiment 1, rats chose between a constant and a variable three pellets under both energy budgets. Rats preferred the constant three pellets more under the positive energy budget, whereas they were indifferent under the negative energy budget. In Experiment 2, rats chose between a constant three pellets and a variable two pellets, and chose between a constant two pellets and a variable three pellets under both energy budgets. The rats strongly preferred the constant three pellets over the variable two pellets under both energy budgets. In contrast, rats preferred the variable three pellets over the constant two pellets only under the negative energy budget, whereas they were indifferent under the positive energy budget. These results indicate that rats choices are sensitive to the difference in reinforcer amounts and to the energy budgets defined by the level of body weight. The present results are consistent with those obtained with small granivorous birds as well as with the predictions of a recent risk-sensitive foraging theory.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (208.8 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Bateson M., Kacelnik A. Preferences for fixed and variable food sources: variability in amount and delay. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 May;63(3):313–329. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.63-313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cicerone R. A. Preference for mixed versus constant delay of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Mar;25(2):257–261. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.25-257. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Davison M. Choice between repleting/depleting patches: A concurrent-schedule procedure. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Nov;58(3):445–469. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.58-445. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Duncan B., Fantino E. Choice for periodic schedules of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1970 Jul;14(1):73–86. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1970.14-73. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- FLESHLER M., HOFFMAN H. S. A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Oct;5:529–530. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hastjarjo T., Silberberg A., Hursh S. R. Risky choice as a function of amount and variance in food supply. J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 Jan;53(1):155–161. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1990.53-155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hursh S. R. Economic concepts for the analysis of behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Sep;34(2):219–238. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.34-219. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ito M., Asaki K. Choice behavior of rats in a concurrent-chains schedule: Amount and delay of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 May;37(3):383–392. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ito M., Fantino E. Choice, foraging, and reinforcer duration. J Exp Anal Behav. 1986 Jul;46(1):93–103. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1986.46-93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- LOGAN F. A. DECISION MAKING BY RATS: UNCERTAIN OUTCOME CHOICES. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1965 Apr;59:246–251. doi: 10.1037/h0021850. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stubbs D. A., Pliskoff S. S. Concurrent responding with fixed relative rate of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Nov;12(6):887–895. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-887. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Williams B. A., Fantino E. Effects on choice of reinforcement delay and conditioned reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Jan;29(1):77–86. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.29-77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]