The paradox of preference for unreliable reinforcement: The role of context and conditioned reinforcement

Abstract

We discuss Belke and Spetch's (1994) work on choice between reliable and unreliable reinforcement. The studies by Belke and Spetch extend a line of basic research demonstrating that under certain experimental conditions in a concurrent chains procedure, pigeons prefer an alternative that produces unreliable reinforcement. The authors describe the variables that influence preference for unreliable reinforcement, including the signaling and the duration of the reinforcement schedules, the context in which the signaling stimuli occur, and the effects of conditioned reinforcement. Hypothetical applied examples that address these variables are provided, and their influence on preference for unreliable reinforcement in humans is discussed. We conclude by suggesting a line of applied research to examine the relationship between these variables and a preference for unreliable reinforcement.