Skip to main content
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior logoLink to Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
. 1968 Nov;11(6):689–702. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-689

Some factors controlling preference between fixed-ratio and variable-ratio schedules of reinforcement1

James A Sherman, John R Thomas
PMCID: PMC1338622  PMID: 16811316

Abstract

A multiple schedule of food reinforcement for key-pecking was arranged which consisted of nine fixed-ratios, each of which operated in the presence of a different stimulus. Pigeons could complete a given fixed-ratio within the multiple schedule or, by pecking a second key, could switch from the fixed-ratio schedule to a variable-ratio schedule consisting of the same nine ratios. Stable switching behavior was established which did not maximize simple probability or rate of reinforcement. Instead, the subjects showed a stable preference for the variable-ratio schedule of food reinforcement. Increasing the number of responses required to switch, and removing the occasions on which reinforcement was delivered after a single response in the variable schedule, decreased the number of switches to the variable schedule. Periods of delay interposed between a completed switch and the availability of reinforcement after one response in the variable schedule also decreased switching to the variable schedule, particularly at long delay intervals.

Full text

PDF
689

Selected References

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

  1. CATANIA A. C. Concurrent performances: reinforcement interaction and response independence. J Exp Anal Behav. 1963 Apr;6:253–263. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1963.6-253. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. FINDLEY J. D. An experimental outline for building and exploring multi-operant behavior repertoires. J Exp Anal Behav. 1962 Jan;5(Suppl):113–166. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1962.5-s113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Fantino E. Effects of required rates of responding upon choice. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jan;11(1):15–22. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Fantino E., Herrnstein R. J. Secondary reinforcement and number of primary reinforcements. J Exp Anal Behav. 1968 Jan;11(1):9–14. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1968.11-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fantino E. Preference for mixed- versus fixed-ratio schedules. J Exp Anal Behav. 1967 Jan;10(1):35–43. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1967.10-35. [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. Weiner H. Preference and switching under ratio contingencies with humans. Psychol Rep. 1966 Feb;18(1):239–246. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1966.18.1.239. [DOI] [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