The stay/switch model describes choice among magnitudes of reinforcers
Section snippets
Subjects
The subjects were six naïve male Sprague–Dawley rats obtained from Hilltop Lab Animals (Scottdale, PA) and deprived to 85% of their just determined free-feeding weights. Following sessions they were fed 5–10 g of food to maintain them at their 85% weights. They were approximately 100 days old when the experiment began and were housed individually in a temperature-controlled colony room on a 14-h light/10 h dark cycle beginning with lights on at 5 a.m. They were housed singly and had free access to
Results
The analysis of all results is based on the sums over the last seven sessions of the number of stay and switch responses at each alternative, the number of reinforcers earned for staying at and for switching from each alternative and the time at each alternative (Table 2). The stay responses at an alternative included all presses after the first press during each visit to that alternative. The responses for switching from an alternative were the first press at the other alternative. The time at
Discussion
The primary purpose of this experiment was to assess whether the stay/switch model could describe behavior allocations when the magnitudes of reinforcers were varied. The stay/switch model provided adequate descriptions of allocations of stay responses for five rats and of time allocations for all six rats. Although the stay/switch model did not adequately describe Rat 819's responding, its description was better than the description by the generalized matching law. The descriptions of time
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Jonathan Galente for building and maintaining the equipment used in this research. I thank Anthony Benners, Ian Hayes, Gigi McGraw and Danielle Siwek for assistance in data collection. I also thank Randy Grace and two anonymous reviewers for very helpful suggestions on earlier versions of the manuscript. This research was supported in part by a Faculty Research Grant from Fordham University. Preparation of this manuscript was supported, in part, by National Institute of Mental
References (19)
Some effects of overall rate of earning reinforcers on run lengths and visit durations
Behav. Process.
(2006)- et al.
Momentary maximizing and optimal foraging theories of performances on concurrent VR schedules
Behav. Process.
(2006) On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching
J. Exp. Anal. Behav.
(1974)- et al.
A quantitative analysis of the responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement
J. Exp. Anal. Behav.
(1968) - et al.
Every reinforcer counts: reinforcer magnitude and local preference
J. Exp. Anal. Behav.
(2003) - et al.
The Matching Law: A Research Review
(1988) Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement
J. Exp. Anal. Behav.
(1961)On the law of effect
J. Exp. Anal. Behav.
(1970)- et al.
Duration and rate of reinforcement as determinants of rate of responding
J. Exp. Anal. Behav.
(1977)
Cited by (2)
An alternative to the stay/switch equation assessed when using a changeover-delay
2015, Behavioural ProcessesCitation Excerpt :From this point of view, standard concurrent schedules are a special case of the four schedule arrangement. This symmetrical arrangement is common, but other arrangements are possible and examining the behavioral effects of different arrangements may inform us about the behavioral processes involved in choice (MacDonall, 2005, 2008, 2009). The stay/switch model focuses on the behavior at an alternative and the choice between staying and switching.
Perception of Food Amounts by Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): The Role of Magnitude, Contiguity, and Wholeness
2009, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes