The Matching Law And Amount-dependent Exponential Discounting As Accounts Of Self-control Choice.

Studies with humans have found evidence for amount-dependent temporal discounting, that is, that the sensitivity of choice to reinforcer delay varies inversely with reinforcer magnitude. To test whether similar results could be obtained with nonhumans, pigeons were trained on a two-component concurrent-chains procedure in which the durations of food reinforcement in the terminal links were equal within components but unequal between components. Terminal-link schedules were varied over four conditions to allow separate estimates of sensitivity to delay to be obtained for the large and small reinforcer-magnitude components. Although sensitivity to delay was greater in the small-magnitude component for all subjects, the effect was quite small. The difference in sensitivity was generally less than one standard error, and t tests on parameter differences failed to reach significance. Several models for temporal discounting, including an amount-dependent exponential function, were fitted to the data from the first four conditions. The resulting parameter estimates were used to make predictions for a self-control condition in which one terminal link arranged a smaller, less delayed reinforcer and the other arranged a larger, more delayed reinforcer. For all models, predictions were considerably more accurate when sensitivity to delay was the same regardless of reinforcer magnitude. The results support the independence of delay and magnitude as required by a version of the matching law, and provide strong evidence against amount-dependent exponential discounting as an account of self-control choice. A new two-parameter discounting function, consistent with the matching law, is proposed that has wide empirical generality for both human and nonhuman data.

[1]  P. Samuelson A Note on Measurement of Utility , 1937 .

[2]  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.

[3]  H S HOFFMAN,et al.  A progression for generating variable-interval schedules. , 1962, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

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

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

[6]  W M Baum,et al.  Choice as time allocation. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[7]  E. Fantino Choice and rate of reinforcement. , 1969, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[8]  P Killeen,et al.  The matching law. , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[9]  D Macewen,et al.  The effects of terminal-link fixed-interval and variable-interval schedules on responding under concurrent chained schedules. , 1972, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[10]  W M Baum,et al.  On two types of deviation from the matching law: bias and undermatching. , 1974, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

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

[12]  J. E. Mazur,et al.  Choice in a "self-control" paradigm: effects of a fading procedure. , 1978, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[13]  E. Fantino,et al.  Effects on choice of reinforcement delay and conditioned reinforcement. , 1978, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[14]  R. Herrnstein,et al.  Preference reversal and delayed reinforcement , 1981 .

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

[16]  Masato Ito,et al.  Choice behavior of rats in a concurrent-chains schedule: Amount and delay of reinforcement. , 1982, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[17]  J. E. Mazur Tests of an equivalence rule for fixed and variable reinforcer delays. , 1984 .

[18]  A W Logue,et al.  Choice in a self-control paradigm: Quantification of experience-based differences. , 1984, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[19]  J. E. Mazur,et al.  Influences of delay and rate of reinforcement on discrete-trial choice. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[20]  Sensitivity of pigeons to prereinforcer and postreinforcer delay , 1985 .

[21]  Monica L. Rodriguez,et al.  Independence of the amount and delay ratios in the generalized matching law , 1986 .

[22]  Alexandra W. Logue,et al.  Effect on choice of absolute and relative values of reinforcer delay, amount, and frequency. , 1987 .

[23]  K G White,et al.  Sensitivity to reinforcer duration in a self-control procedure. , 1987, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[24]  J. E. Mazur An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. , 1987 .

[25]  M. Bonem,et al.  Elucidating the effects of reinforcement magnitude. , 1988, Psychological bulletin.

[26]  A. Logue Research on self-control: An integrating framework , 1988, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[27]  M. Davison,et al.  The matching law: A research review. , 1988 .

[28]  U. Ben-Zion,et al.  Discount rates inferred from decisions: an experimental study , 1989 .

[29]  P. Kop Reinforcement, choice and response strength , 1990 .

[30]  D. Cross,et al.  Subjective probability and delay. , 1991, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[31]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice: Evidence and an Interpretation , 1992 .

[32]  H. Rachlin,et al.  The effect of temporal constraints on the value of money and other commodities , 1993 .

[33]  T. Omino A quantitative analysis of sensitivity to the conditioned reinforcing value of terminal-link stimuli in a concurrent-chains schedule. , 1993, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[34]  Joel Myerson,et al.  ALTERNATIVE FRAMEWORKS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF SELF CONTROL , 1993 .

[35]  R. A. Preston,et al.  Delay reduction: current status. , 1993, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[36]  R. Grace A contextual model of concurrent-chains choice. , 1994, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[37]  Ben A. Williams,et al.  CHAPTER 4 – Reinforcement and Choice , 1994 .

[38]  A. Logue,et al.  The effect of variable delays on self-control. , 1994, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[39]  L. Green,et al.  Temporal discounting and preference reversals in choice between delayed outcomes , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[40]  L. Green,et al.  Discounting of Delayed Rewards: A Life-Span Comparison , 1994 .

[41]  L. Green,et al.  Discounting of delayed rewards: Models of individual choice. , 1995, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[42]  R. Herrnstein,et al.  Preference Reversals Due to Myopic Discounting of Delayed Reward , 1995 .

[43]  R. Grace Temporal context and choice , 1995 .

[44]  R C Grace Independence of reinforcement delay and magnitude in concurrent chains. , 1995, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[45]  R. Grace Choice between fixed and variable delays to reinforcement in the adjusting-delay procedure and concurrent chains. , 1996 .

[46]  K. Kirby,et al.  Delay-discounting probabilistic rewards: Rates decrease as amounts increase , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[47]  J. E. Mazur Choice, delay, probability, and conditioned reinforcement , 1997 .

[48]  K. Kirby,et al.  Bidding on the Future: Evidence Against Normative Discounting of Delayed Rewards , 1997 .