Choice: Effects of changeover schedules on concurrent performance.

The components of concurrent schedules were separated temporally by placing interval schedules on the changeover key. The rates of responding on both the main and changeover keys were examined as a function of the reinforcement rates. In the first experiment, the sensitivity of main-key performance to changing reinforcement rates was inversely related to the temporal separation of components, and changeover performance was monotonically related to the ratio of the reinforcement rates. In the second experiment, when the ratio of the reinforcement rates was scheduled to remain constant while the frequency of reinforcement was varied, changeover performance did not remain constant. A "sampling" interpretation of changeover responding was proposed and subsequently tested in a third experiment where extinction was always scheduled in one component and the frequency of reinforcement was varied in the second component. It was concluded that changeover performance can be interpreted using molar measures of reinforcement and that animals sample activities available to them at rates which are controlled by relative reinforcement rates.

[1]  W. K. Honig Operant behavior : areas of research and application , 1966 .

[2]  S S Pliskoff,et al.  Concurrent schedules: a quantitative relation between changeover behavior and its consequences. , 1977, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[3]  I W Hunter,et al.  Response rate and changeover performance on concurrent variable-interval schedules. , 1978, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[4]  K L Wheatley,et al.  Matching to relative reinforcement frequency in multiple schedules with a short component duration. , 1971, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[5]  M. Rilling,et al.  Aversive properties of the negative stimulus in a successive discrimination. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[6]  W. Hoeffding,et al.  Rank Correlation Methods , 1949 .

[7]  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.

[8]  R L Menlove,et al.  Local patterns of responding maintained by concurrent and multiple schedules. , 1975, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[9]  A. Neuringer Superstitious key pecking after three peck-produced reinforcements. , 1970, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[10]  I W Hunter,et al.  Performance on variable-interval schedules arranged singly and concurrently. , 1976, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[11]  R. Herrnstein On the law of effect. , 1970, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[12]  D L Myers,et al.  Undermatching: a reappraisal of performance on concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. , 1977, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[13]  W M Baum,et al.  The correlation-based law of effect. , 1973, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[14]  M C Davison,et al.  Performance in concurrent interval schedules: a systematic replication. , 1975, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[15]  D M THOMPSON,et al.  ESCAPE FROM SD ASSOCIATED WITH FIXED-RATIO REINFORCEMENT. , 1964, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[16]  E. L. Edmon Multiple schedule component duration: a reanalysis of Shimp and Wheatley (1971) and Todorov (1972). , 1978, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[17]  L R Gollub,et al.  Behavioral interactions in multiple variable-interval schedules. , 1974, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[18]  N. Squires,et al.  Choice behavior and the accessibility of the reinforcer. , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[19]  William M. Baum,et al.  BEHAVIORAL CONTRAST OF TIME ALLOCATION1 , 1976 .

[20]  G. D. Lachter Some temporal parameters of non-contingent reinforcement. , 1971, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[21]  A. Catania,et al.  Concurrent performances: inhibition of one response by reinforcement of another. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[22]  J C Todorov,et al.  Component duration and relative response rates in multiple schedules. , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

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

[24]  C. Shimp Probabilistically reinforced choice behavior in pigeons. , 1966, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[25]  J D Findley,et al.  Preference and Switching under Concurrent Scheduling. , 1958, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.