Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1994 Nov;62(3):385–397. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.62-385

Cued and uncued terminal links in concurrent-chains schedules

Brent Alsop, Karen E Stewart, Werner K Honig
PMCID: PMC1334474  PMID: 16812748

Abstract

Pigeons were trained on a concurrent-chains schedule. The initial links were concurrent variable-interval schedules arranged on two side keys. Each terminal link was a fixed-interval schedule arranged on the center key. In cued conditions, different center-key colors signaled the two terminal-link schedules. In uncued conditions, the same center-key color appeared for both terminal links. Experiment 1 arranged unequal initial links and equal terminal links. Preference for the shorter initial-link schedule was greater when the terminal links were uncued. Experiment 2 arranged equal initial links and unequal terminal links. Preference for the shorter terminal-link schedule was greater when the terminal links were cued. Although the results of Experiment 2 successfully replicated previous research, the results of Experiment 1 are not easily reconciled with conditioned-reinforcement or discriminative-stimulus accounts of the role of terminal-link cues. Rather, terminal-link cues appear to decrease sensitivity to initial-link contingencies.

Keywords: choice, concurrent-chains schedules, conditioned reinforcement, terminal-link cues, key peck, pigeon

Full text

PDF
385

Selected References

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

  1. Alsop B., Davison M. Discriminability between alternatives in a switching-key concurrent schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1992 Jan;57(1):51–65. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1992.57-51. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Baum W. M. Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Sep;32(2):269–281. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.32-269. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. 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]
  4. Davison M. C. Preference for fixed-interval schedules: effects of unequal initial links. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 May;25(3):371–376. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.25-371. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Davison M. Bias and sensitivity to reinforcement in a concurrent-chain schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Jul;40(1):15–34. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.40-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Findley J. D. Preference and Switching under Concurrent Scheduling. J Exp Anal Behav. 1958 Apr;1(2):123–144. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1958.1-123. [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. Harnett P., McCarthy D., Davison M. Delayed signal detection, differential reinforcement, and short-term memory in the pigeon. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Jul;42(1):87–111. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. 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]
  10. 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]
  11. Omino T. A quantitative analysis of sensitivity to the conditioned reinforcing value of terminal-link stimuli in a concurrent-chains schedule. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Nov;60(3):587–594. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.60-587. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Omino T., Ito M. Choice and delay of reinforcement: Effects of terminal-link stimulus and response conditions. J Exp Anal Behav. 1993 Mar;59(2):361–371. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1993.59-361. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Squires N., Fantino E. A model for choice in simple concurrent and concurrent-chains schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1971 Jan;15(1):27–38. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1971.15-27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. 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]
  15. Taylor R., Davison M. Sensitivity to reinforcement in concurrent arithmetic and exponential schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Jan;39(1):191–198. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.39-191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Wearden J. H., Burgess I. S. Matching since Baum (1979). J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Nov;38(3):339–348. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.38-339. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Williams B. A., Dunn R. Preference for conditioned reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1991 Jan;55(1):37–46. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1991.55-37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. 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]

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

RESOURCES