Psychological distance to reward: equating the number of stimulus and response segments
- PMID: 15110910
- DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2004.01.003
Psychological distance to reward: equating the number of stimulus and response segments
Abstract
Psychological distance to reward, or the segmentation effect, refers to the preference for a terminal link of a concurrent-chains schedule consisting of a simple reinforcement schedule (e.g. fixed interval [FI] 30s) relative to its chained-schedule counterpart (e.g. chained FI 15s FI 15s). This experiment was conducted to examine whether the segmentation effect is due to the number of terminal-link stimulus and response segments per se. Three pigeons pecked under a concurrent-chains schedule in which identical variable-interval (VI) schedules operated in the initial links. In each session, half the terminal-link entries followed one initial-link key and the other half followed the other initial-link key. The initial-link keys correlated with the different terminal links were manipulated across conditions. In the first three conditions, each terminal link contained a chained fixed-time (FT) FT schedule, and in the final three conditions, each terminal link contained a chained FI FI schedule. In each condition, in one terminal link (alternating), the order of two key colors correlated with the different schedule segments alternated across terminal-link entries, whereas in the other terminal link (constant), the order of two other key colors was identical for each entry. With the chained FT FT schedule terminal links, there was indifference between the alternating and constant terminal links within and across pigeons, as indexed by initial-link choice proportions. In addition, terminal-link response rates were relatively low. With the chained FI FI schedule terminal links, for each pigeon, there was relatively more preference for the alternating terminal link and terminal-link response rates increased relative to conditions with the chained FT FT schedule terminal links. These data suggest that the segmentation effect is not due simply to the number of terminal-link stimulus or response segments per se, but rather to a required period of responding during a stimulus segment that never is paired with reinforcement.
Similar articles
-
The role of terminal-link stimuli in concurrent-chain schedules: revisited using a behavioral-history procedure.Behav Processes. 2005 Aug 31;70(1):1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2005.02.024. Epub 2005 Mar 19. Behav Processes. 2005. PMID: 15967283
-
Segmentation and the pairing hypothesis.Behav Processes. 2004 Sep 30;67(2):111-9. doi: 10.1016/S0376-6357(03)00053-6. Behav Processes. 2004. PMID: 15240049
-
Rapid acquisition in concurrent chains: effects of initial-link duration.Behav Processes. 2008 Jun;78(2):217-23. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2008.01.006. Epub 2008 Jan 17. Behav Processes. 2008. PMID: 18304759
-
Acquisition of choice in concurrent chains: Assessing the cumulative decision model.Behav Processes. 2016 May;126:82-93. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2016.03.011. Epub 2016 Mar 19. Behav Processes. 2016. PMID: 27005579 Review.
-
The effect of conditioned reinforcement rate on choice: a review.J Exp Anal Behav. 2007 May;87(3):409-21. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2007.44-06. J Exp Anal Behav. 2007. PMID: 17575906 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Induced attack during fixed-ratio and matched-time schedules of food presentation.J Exp Anal Behav. 2008 Jan;89(1):31-48. doi: 10.1901/jeab.2008.89-31. J Exp Anal Behav. 2008. PMID: 18338674 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources