Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1984 Jan;41(1):53–67. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-53

Choice in a self-control paradigm: Quantification of experience-based differences

A W Logue, Monica L Rodriguez, Telmo E Peña-Correal, Benjamin C Mauro
PMCID: PMC1347956  PMID: 16812358

Abstract

Previous quantitative models of choice in a self-control paradigm (choice between a larger, more-delayed reinforcer and a smaller, less-delayed reinforcer) have not described individual differences. Two experiments are reported that provide additional quantitative data on experience-based differences in choice between reinforcers of varying sizes and delays. In Experiment 1, seven pigeons in a self-control paradigm were exposed to a fading procedure that increased choices of the larger, more-delayed reinforcer through gradually decreasing the delay to the smaller of two equally delayed reinforcers. Three control subjects, exposed to each of the small-reinforcer delays to which the experimental subjects were exposed, but for fewer sessions, demonstrated that lengthy exposure to each of the conditions in the fading procedure may be necessary in order for the increase to occur. In Experiment 2, pigeons with and without fading-procedure exposure chose between reinforcers of varying sizes and delays scheduled according to a concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedule. In both experiments, pigeons with fading-procedure exposure were more sensitive to variations in reinforcer size than reinforcer delay when compared with pigeons without this exposure. The data were described by the generalized matching law when the relative size of its exponents, representing subjects' relative sensitivity to reinforcer size and delay, were grouped according to subjects' experience.

Keywords: self-control, individual differences, matching law, delay of reinforcement, amount of reinforcement, key peck, pigeons

Full text

PDF
53

Selected References

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

  1. Ainslie G. W. Impulse control in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 May;21(3):485–489. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.21-485. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ainslie G. Specious reward: a behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control. Psychol Bull. 1975 Jul;82(4):463–496. doi: 10.1037/h0076860. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Baum W. M. Chained concurrent schedules: reinforcement as situation transition. J Exp Anal Behav. 1974 Jul;22(1):91–101. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1974.22-91. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. 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]
  5. 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]
  6. 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]
  7. Davison M. C., Hunter I. W. Concurrent schedules: undermatching and control by previous experimental conditions. J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Sep;32(2):233–244. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.32-233. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. 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]
  9. Davison M. Preference in concurrent variable-interval fixed-ratio schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Jan;37(1):81–96. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Dunn R., Fantino E. Choice and the relative immediacy of reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Nov;38(3):321–326. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.38-321. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. FERSTER C. B. Sustained behavior under delayed reinforcement. J Exp Psychol. 1953 Apr;45(4):218–224. doi: 10.1037/h0062158. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. 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]
  13. 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]
  14. Gentry G. D., Marr M. J. Choice and reinforcement delay. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Jan;33(1):27–37. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. 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]
  16. Grosch J., Neuringer A. Self-control in pigeons under the Mischel paradigm. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 Jan;35(1):3–21. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.35-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Hicks R. E., Miller G. W., Kinsbourne M. Prospective and retrospective judgments of time as a function of amount of information processed. Am J Psychol. 1976 Dec;89(4):719–730. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Hinson J. M., Staddon J. E. Hill-climbing by pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Jan;39(1):25–47. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.39-25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hunter I., Davison M. Independence of response force and reinforcement rate on concurrent variable-interval schedule performance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Mar;37(2):183–197. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. 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]
  21. Keller J. V., Gollub L. R. Duration and rate of reinforcement as determinants of concurrent responding. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Sep;28(2):145–153. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.28-145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Mazur J. E., Logue A. W. Choice in a "self-control" paradigm: effects of a fading procedure. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 Jul;30(1):11–17. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.30-11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Miller H. L. Matching-based hedonic scaling in the pigeon. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Nov;26(3):335–347. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.26-335. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Rachlin H., Green L. Commitment, choice and self-control. J Exp Anal Behav. 1972 Jan;17(1):15–22. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1972.17-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. STEVENS S. S. On the psychophysical law. Psychol Rev. 1957 May;64(3):153–181. doi: 10.1037/h0046162. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Schneider J. W. Reinforcer effectiveness as a function of reinforcer rate and magnitude: a comparison of concurrent performances. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Nov;20(3):461–471. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-461. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. 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]
  28. 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]
  29. Todorov J. C. Interaction of frequency and magnitude of reinforcement on concurrent performances. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 May;19(3):451–458. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.19-451. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. 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]
  31. Wearden J. H. Undermatching on concurrent variable-interval schedules and the power law. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Jan;33(1):149–152. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. 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