Human Performance Under Sequences of Fixed-Ratio Schedules: Effects of Ratio Size and Magnitude of Reinforcement

In a discrete-trials procedure, adult humans chose between two sequential fixed-ratio (FR) schedules. Points, later exchangeable for money, were given for the completion of each FR. When each sequence produced two points for an equal number of responses overall, the value of the first FR in a sequence did not affect choice. When the values of the first FR in each sequence were equal, subjects preferred the alternative with the smaller second FR. Once a preference was established for the alternative with the smaller overall response requirement, two points were given for completing the second FR of the nonpreferred sequence. This sequence then provided three total points. Preference immediately shifted to the alternative requiring more responses overall (and per point) but offering more points.

[1]  B. Schwartz,et al.  Effects of reinforcement magnitude on pigeons' preference for different fixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[2]  A. Poling,et al.  Preference in pigeons given a choice between sequences of fixed-ratio schedules: Effects of ratio values and duration of food delivery. , 1984, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[3]  A. Poling,et al.  Choice between sequences of fixed-ratio schedules: effects of ratio values and probability of food delivery. , 1987, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[4]  Richard J. Herrnstein,et al.  MAXIMIZING AND MATCHING ON CONCURRENT RATIO SCHEDULES1 , 1975 .

[5]  H Rachlin,et al.  Commitment, choice and self-control. , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[6]  A J Neuringer,et al.  Effects of reinforcement magnitude on choice and rate of responding. , 1967, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[7]  H Weiner,et al.  Controlling human fixed-interval performance. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[8]  W C BLAIR,et al.  Measurement of observing responses in human monitoring. , 1958, Science.

[9]  L. Lippman,et al.  Fixed interval performance as related to instructions and to subjects’ verbalizations of the contingency , 1967 .

[10]  S. H. Chung,et al.  Effects of delayed reinforcement in a concurrent situation. , 1965, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[11]  Edmund Fantino,et al.  Self-control and general models of choice. , 1976 .

[12]  H WEINER,et al.  Some effects of response cost upon human operant behavior. , 1962, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[13]  L. Green,et al.  Preference reversal and self control: choice as a function of reward amount and delay , 1981 .

[14]  A C CATANIA,et al.  Concurrent performances: a baseline for the study of reinforcement magnitude. , 1963, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[15]  R Poppen,et al.  The Fixed-Interval Scallop in Human Affairs , 1982, The Behavior analyst.