Abstract
Pigeons responded in a successive-encounters choice procedure in which accessibility of the less profitable of two outcomes varied either in terms of probability of encounter or search time to encounter (keeping search time to the more profitable outcome constant). When the less profitable outcome was made more probable its acceptance became more likely. However, when search time to encounter the less profitable outcome was shortened, its acceptance became less likely. Both results are consistent with the delay-reduction hypothesis and with an optimality model developed for application to the successive-encounters choice procedure.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Abarca N., Fantino E. Choice and foraging. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Sep;38(2):117–123. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.38-117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Case D. A., Fantino E. The delay-reduction hypothesis of conditioned reinforcement and punishment: Observing behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 Jan;35(1):93–108. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.35-93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Elliffe D., Davison M. Performance in continuously available multiple schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Nov;44(3):343–353. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.44-343. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fantino E., Case D. A. Human observing: Maintained by stimuli correlated with reinforcement but not extinction. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Sep;40(2):193–210. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.40-193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- Hursh S. R. Behavioral economics. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Nov;42(3):435–452. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.42-435. [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]
- 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]
- La Fiette M. H., Fantino E. The effects of component duration on multiple-schedule performance in closed and open economies. J Exp Anal Behav. 1988 Nov;50(3):457–468. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1988.50-457. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mazur J. E., Snyderman M., Coe D. Influences of delay and rate of reinforcement on discrete-trial choice. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1985 Oct;11(4):565–575. [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]