Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1986 Nov;46(3):331–351. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1986.46-331

More on concurrent interval-ratio schedules: a replication and review.

G M Heyman, R J Herrnstein
PMCID: PMC1348271  PMID: 3805975

Abstract

It has been suggested that the failure to maximize reinforcement on concurrent variable-interval, variable-ratio schedules may be misleading. Inasmuch as response costs are not directly measured, it is possible that subjects are optimally balancing the benefits of reinforcement against the costs of responding. To evaluate this hypothesis, pigeons were tested in a procedure in which interval and ratio schedules had equal response costs. On a concurrent variable time (VT), variable ratio-time (VRT) schedule, the VT schedule runs throughout the session and the VRT schedule is controlled by responses to a changeover key that switches from one schedule to the other. Reinforcement is presented independent of response. This schedule retains the essential features of concurrent VI VR, but eliminates differential response costs for the two alternatives. It therefore also eliminates at least one significant ambiguity about the reinforcement maximizing performance. Pigeons did not maximize rate of reinforcement on this procedure. Instead, their times spent on the alternative schedules matched the relative rates of reinforcement, even when schedule parameters were such that matching earned the lowest possible overall rate of reinforcement. It was further shown that the observed matching was not a procedural artifact arising from the constraints built into the schedule.

Full text

PDF
331

Selected References

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

  1. Bacotti A. V. Matching under concurrent fixed-ratio variable-interval schedules of food presentation. J Exp Anal Behav. 1977 Jan;27(1):171–182. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1977.27-171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. 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]
  3. Baum W. M. Optimization and the matching law as accounts of instrumental behavior. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 Nov;36(3):387–403. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.36-387. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Baum W. M. The correlation-based law of effect. J Exp Anal Behav. 1973 Jul;20(1):137–153. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1973.20-137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. DeCarlo L. T. Matching and maximizing with variable-time schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1985 Jan;43(1):75–81. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1985.43-75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Green L., Rachlin H., Hanson J. Matching and maximizing with concurrent ratio-interval schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Nov;40(3):217–224. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.40-217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Herrnstein R. J., Heyman G. M. Is matching compatible with reinforcement maximization on concurrent variable interval variable ratio? J Exp Anal Behav. 1979 Mar;31(2):209–223. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1979.31-209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Herrnstein R. J., Loveland D. H. Maximizing and matching on concurrent ratio schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1975 Jul;24(1):107–116. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1975.24-107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. 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]
  10. 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]
  11. Hinson J. M., Staddon J. E. Matching, maximizing, and hill-climbing. J Exp Anal Behav. 1983 Nov;40(3):321–331. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1983.40-321. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Houston A. I., McNamara J. How to maximize reward rate on two variable-interval paradigms. J Exp Anal Behav. 1981 May;35(3):367–396. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1981.35-367. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Houston A. The matching law applies to wagtails' foraging in the wild. J Exp Anal Behav. 1986 Jan;45(1):15–18. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1986.45-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Nevin J. A. Interval reinforcement of choice behavior in discrete trials. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Nov;12(6):875–885. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-875. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Schwartz B. Development of complex, stereotyped behavior in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1980 Mar;33(2):153–166. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1980.33-153. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Ziriax J. M., Silberberg A. Concurrent variable-interval variable-ratio schedules can provide only weak evidence for matching. J Exp Anal Behav. 1984 Jan;41(1):83–100. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1984.41-83. [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