Abstract
Rats obtained access to food twice each 24-hour period. The first session was a work session in which food was available on a progressive-ratio schedule. During the second session, which occurred between 1 and 23 hours after the work session, food was freely available up to a fixed total intake each 24 hours. The situation resembled elements of several real world circumstances, including the choice between continuing to forage in a rapidly depleting patch and waiting for a better patch, and between working now and receiving a guaranteed income later. The purpose of the experiment was to explore the time period over which future access to reward could affect current responding. Contrary to what might be expected from recent theorizing, anticipation of future food delayed by an hour or more after the start of the work session had no effect on current performance. Food intake was high and constant during work sessions except for a prefeeding effect that occurred when the free session closely preceded the next day's work session. Also, an increase in the difficulty of the work schedule increased the amount of work and the maximum price paid for food as if the work session were the only time food was available. The results indicate the importance of considering temporal limits in theories that require animals to integrate input over time to determine the allocation of resources among alternatives.
Keywords: optimality theory, behavior regulation, welfare, foraging, rats
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Allison J. Contrast, induction, facilitation, suppression, and conservation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Mar;25(2):185–198. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1976.25-185. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Belovsky G. E. Diet optimization in a generalist herbivore: the moose. Theor Popul Biol. 1978 Aug;14(1):105–134. doi: 10.1016/0040-5809(78)90007-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Boulos Z., Terman M. Food availability and daily biological rhythms. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1980 Summer;4(2):119–131. doi: 10.1016/0149-7634(80)90010-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Charnov E. L. Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theor Popul Biol. 1976 Apr;9(2):129–136. doi: 10.1016/0040-5809(76)90040-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- HODOS W., KALMAN G. Effects of increment size and reinforcer volume on progressive ratio performance. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Jul;6:387–392. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-387. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hodos W., Trumbule G. H. Strategies of schedule preference in chimpanzees. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967 Nov;10(6):503–514. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-503. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hursh S. R. The economics of daily consumption controlling food- and water-reinforced responding. J Exp Anal Behav. 1978 May;29(3):475–491. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1978.29-475. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McSweeney F. K. Positive and negative contrast as a function of component duration for key pecking and treadle pressing. J Exp Anal Behav. 1982 Mar;37(2):281–293. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1982.37-281. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 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]