Free-operant choice behavior: A molecular analysis.

Pigeons' pecks to two concurrent initial-link stimuli occasionally produced one of two mutually exclusive terminal links. Further responding to the terminal-link stimulus produced food under fixed-interval or fixed-ratio schedules. In such concurrent chained schedules, investigators rarely use a changeover delay to control superstitious switching, although it is customary to use a changeover delay in simple concurrent schedules in which choice responses produce food directly. When terminal-link fixed-interval schedules were equal or similar in duration and no changeover delay was employed, conditional probabilities of choice for a schedule were found to be lower if the last choice was for that schedule than if the last choice was for the other schedule ("switching dependency"). Imposition of a changeover delay with equal or unequal terminal links produced the opposite pattern: conditional probabilities of choice for a schedule were higher if the last choice was for that schedule than if the last choice was for the other schedule. Turning off all chamber lights during the changeover delay interval attenuated these "repetition dependencies." The results indicate that excessive switching can complicate the interpretation of data from concurrent chains much as from simple concurrent schedules, and that using blackouts to control switching may be preferable to using a changeover delay.

[1]  J. Todorov Concurrent performances: effect of punishment contingent on the switching response. , 1971, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[2]  C. Bradshaw,et al.  Behavior of humans in variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. , 1976, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[3]  F Mechner,et al.  Probability Relations within Response Sequences under Ratio Reinforcement. , 1958, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

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

[5]  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.

[6]  D. Blough The reinforcement of least-frequent interresponse times. , 1966, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[7]  D. Anger The dependence of interresponse times upon the relative reinforcement of different interresponse times. , 1956, Journal of experimental psychology.

[8]  Edmund Fantino,et al.  Stochastic transitivity and unidimensional behavior theories , 1974 .

[9]  D. Stubbs,et al.  Concurrent responding with fixed relative rate of reinforcement. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[10]  E. Fantino,et al.  Choice, rate of reinforcement, and the changeover delay. , 1970, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[11]  S. Schroeder,et al.  REINFORCEMENT OF EYE MOVEMENT WITH CONCURRENT SCHEDULES1 , 1969 .

[12]  D R Williams,et al.  Choice behavior on discrete trials: a demonstration of the occurrence of a response strategy. , 1974, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[13]  A C Catania Concurrent performances: rate constancies without changeover delays. , 1976, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[14]  M. Davison Preference for mixed-interval versus fixed-interval schedules. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[15]  A. Silberberg,et al.  The Structure of Choice , 1978 .

[16]  G M Heyman,et al.  A Markov model description of changeover probabilities on concurrent variable-interval schedules. , 1979, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.