Preference for free choice over forced choice in pigeons.

In a six-key chamber variable-interval initial links of concurrent-chain schedules operated on two lower white keys. Terminal links operated on four upper keys; green keys were correlated with fixed-interval reinforcement and red keys with extinction. Free-choice terminal links arranged three green keys and one red key; forced-choice terminal links arranged one green key and three red keys. Thus, terminal links were equivalent in number, variety, and information value (in bits) of the keylights. Preferences (relative initial-link rates) were studied both with location of the odd key color varying over successive terminal links and with the odd color fixed at key locations that had controlled either relatively high or relatively low terminal-link response rates. Free choice was consistently preferred to forced choice. Magnitude of preference did not vary systematically with terminal-link response rate or stimulus control by green and red keys. The origins of free-choice preference could be ontogenic or phylogenic: organisms may learn that momentarily preferred alternatives are more often available in free than in forced choice, and evolutionary contingencies may favor the survival of organisms that prefer free to forced choice.

[1]  R. Herrnstein Stereotypy and Intermittent Reinforcement , 1961, Science.

[2]  A. Catania,et al.  Freedom and knowledge: an experimental analysis of preference in pigeons. , 1975, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[3]  C. Shimp,et al.  Choice between concurrent schedules. , 1973, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[4]  R J HERRNSTEIN,et al.  Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. , 1961, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[5]  Autoshaping: Relation of feeder color to choice of key color , 1977 .

[6]  A. Catania,et al.  Freedom of Choice: A Behavioral Analysis1 , 1980 .

[7]  K. D. Roeder Neural factors and evitability in insect behavior. , 1975, The Journal of experimental zoology.

[8]  W. N. Schoenfeld,et al.  Conditioning Response Variability , 1966, Psychological reports.

[9]  G. S. Reynolds,et al.  A quantitative analysis of the responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement. , 1968, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[10]  B F Skinner,et al.  The shaping of phylogenic behavior. , 1975, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[11]  R. Lanson,et al.  Variability of response location for pigeons responding under continuous reinforcement, intermittent reinforcement, and extinction. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[12]  S. Leigland,et al.  Deviations from matching as a measure of preference for alternatives in pigeons. , 1979, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[13]  P. Rozin,et al.  Specific hungers and poison avoidance as adaptive specializations of learning. , 1971, Psychological review.

[14]  A J Neuringer,et al.  Delayed reinforcement versus reinforcement after a fixed interval. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[15]  CHOICE AND RESPONSE CONTINGENCIES1 , 1975 .

[16]  R. Herrnstein SECONDARY REINFORCEMENT AND RATE OF PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT. , 1964, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[17]  B. Skinner The phylogeny and ontogeny of behavior , 1966, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.