Abstract
Ideal free distribution theory predicts that foragers will form groups proportional in number to the resources available in alternative resource sites or patches, a phenomenon termed habitat matching. Three experiments tested this prediction with college students in discrete-trial simulations and a free-operant simulation. Sensitivity to differences in programmed reinforcement rates was quantified by using the sensitivity parameter of the generalized matching law (s). The first experiment, replicating prior published experiments, produced a greater degree of undermatching for the initial choice (s = 0.59) compared to final choices (s = 0.86). The second experiment, which extended prior findings by allowing only one choice per trial, produced comparable undermatching (s = 0.82). The third experiment used free-operant procedures more typical of laboratory studies of habitat matching with other species and produced the most undermatching (s = 0.71). The results of these experiments replicated previous results with human groups, supported predictions of the ideal free distribution, and suggested that undermatching represents a systematic deviation from the ideal free distribution. These results are consistent with a melioration account of individual behavior as the basis for group choice.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (220.3 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Baum W. M. On two types of deviation from the matching law: bias and undermatching. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jul;22(1):231–242. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Baum W. M., Rachlin H. C. Choice as time allocation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Nov;12(6):861–874. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-861. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Baum W., Kraft J. Group choice: competition, travel, and the ideal free distribution. J Exp Anal Behav. 1998 May;69(3):227–245. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1998.69-227. [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]
- Grace R. C. Independence of reinforcement delay and magnitude in concurrent chains. J Exp Anal Behav. 1995 May;63(3):255–276. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1995.63-255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- 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]
- Kraft J. R., Baum W. M. Group choice: the ideal free distribution of human social behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 2001 Jul;76(1):21–42. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2001.76-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sokolowski M. B., Tonneau F., Freixa i Baqué E. The ideal free distribution in humans: an experimental test. Psychon Bull Rev. 1999 Mar;6(1):157–161. doi: 10.3758/bf03210824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]