Abstract
The concurrent-chains procedure has been used to measure how choice depends on various aspects of reinforcement, such as its delay and its magnitude. Navarick and Fantino (1972, 1974, 1975) have found that choice in this procedure can violate the condition of stochastic transitivity that is required if a unidimensional scale for reinforcements is to be possible. It is shown in this paper that two simple unidimensional models of choice on concurrent chains can produce violations of stochastic transitivity. It is argued that such violations may result from the complex contingencies of the concurrent-chains procedure.
Keywords: transitivity, concurrent chains, reinforcement delay, reinforcement magnitude, preference, delay reduction, matching
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Fantino E. Choice and rate of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Sep;12(5):723–730. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-723. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- HERRNSTEIN R. J. APERIODICITY AS A FACTOR IN CHOICE. J Exp Anal Behav. 1964 Mar;7:179–182. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1964.7-179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- Heyman G. M. A Markov model description of changeover probabilities on concurrent variable-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Jan;31(1):41–51. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.31-41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Houston A. I., McNamara J. M., Sumida B. H. Relative allocation on concurrent schedules can depend on schedule parameters when behavioral parameters are constant. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 Jan;47(1):127–131. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.47-127. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Houston A. I., Sumida B. H., McNamara J. M. The maximization of overall reinforcement rate on concurrent chains. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 Jul;48(1):133–143. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.48-133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Killeen P. R., Fantino E. Unification of models for choice between delayed reinforcers. J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 Jan;53(1):189–200. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1990.53-189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Killeen P. R. Incentive theory: II. Models for choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Sep;38(2):217–232. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.38-217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Killeen P. On the measurement of reinforcement frequency in the study of preference. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 May;11(3):263–269. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mazur J. E., Coe D. Tests of transitivity in choices between fixed and variable reinforcer delays. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 May;47(3):287–297. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.47-287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mazur J. E., Coe D. Tests of transitivity in choices between fixed and variable reinforcer delays. J Exp Anal Behav. 1987 May;47(3):287–297. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1987.47-287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mazur J. E. Fixed and variable ratios and delays: further tests of an equivalence rule. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1986 Apr;12(2):116–124. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Navarick D. J., Fantino E. Transitivity as a property of choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Nov;18(3):389–401. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.18-389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vaughan W. Choice: A local analysis. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 May;43(3):383–405. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.43-383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]