Effects of differential reinforcement and rules with feedback on preference for choice and verbal reports

Abstract

We evaluated the effects of differential reinforcement and accurate verbal rules with feedback on the preference for choice and the verbal reports of 6 adults. Participants earned points on a probabilistic schedule by completing the terminal links of a concurrent-chains arrangement in a computer-based game of chance. In free-choice terminal links, participants selected 3 numbers from an 8-number array; in restricted-choice terminal links participants selected the order of 3 numbers preselected by a computer program. A pop-up box then informed the participants if the numbers they selected or ordered matched or did not match numbers generated by the computer but not displayed; matching in a trial resulted in one point earned. In baseline sessions, schedules of reinforcement were equal across free- and restricted-choice arrangements and a running tally of points earned was shown each trial. The effects of differentially reinforcing restricted-choice selections were evaluated using a reversal design. For 4 participants, the effects of providing a running tally of points won by arrangement and verbal rules regarding the schedule of reinforcement were also evaluated using a nonconcurrent multiple-baseline-across-participants design. Results varied across participants but generally demonstrated that (a) preference for choice corresponded more closely to verbal reports of the odds of winning than to reinforcement schedules, (b) rules and feedback were correlated with more accurate verbal reports, and (c) preference for choice corresponded more highly to the relative number of reinforcements obtained across free- and restricted-choice arrangements in a session than to the obtained probability of reinforcement or to verbal reports of the odds of winning.

Keywords: choice; concurrent-chains arrangement; differential reinforcement; preference; probabilistic; rule-governed behavior; self-rules; verbal reports.

Figure 1. Schematic representing the concurrent-chains arrangement. During exposure trials, only one initial link was presented (FC  =  free choice; RC =  restricted choice); during choice trials both initial links were presented. One click of the computer mouse (FR  =  fixed ratio) within one of the initial links brought up the corresponding terminal link. Clicking on three numbers and a “Ready” button (FR 4) completed the terminal link, resulting in a point delivery on a variable-ratio (VR; exposure trials) or random-ratio (RR; choice trials) schedule. Following completion of the terminal link, the cycle started over.

Figure 2. Schematic representing the restricted-choice terminal link in the rules condition. In this schematic, the participant has clicked on the number 6 and has two more numbers to enter (“3” and “8,” in any order). His points going into the trial are 9; 4 of these points were delivered following free-choice terminal link completions and 5 were delivered following restricted-choice terminal link completions.

Figure 3. Choice quotient measured per choice set (black squares) and per session (grey lines) and verbal reports of the “odds of winning,” (white squares) for Chloe, Xavier, Edmond, and Robert (from top panel to bottom panel, respectively). For verbal reports, F, R, and S indicate the participant reported the odds of winning were better following free choice (F), restricted choice (R), or “about the same” (S). The unlabeled arrows indicate increases in the programmed differential reinforcement. For Edmond, during choice sets 10–12 free-choice selections were differentially reinforced due to experimenter error. (NC  =  No Differential Reinforcement; FC  =  Differential Reinforcement of Free Choice; RC  =  Differential Reinforcement of Restricted Choice).

Figure 4. Choice quotient measured per choice set (black squares) and per session (grey lines) and verbal reports of the “odds of winning,” (white squares) for Lucy (top panel) and Alysa (bottom panel). For verbal reports, F, R, and S indicate the participant reported the odds of winning were better following free choice (F), restricted choice (R), or “about the same” (S). The unlabeled arrows indicate increases in the programmed differential reinforcement. (NC  =  No Differential Reinforcement; FC  =  Differential Reinforcement of Free Choice; RC  =  Differential Reinforcement of Restricted Choice).

Figure 5. Mean correspondence of preference to schedules of reinforcement during No-Rules sessions (black squares) and Rules-with-Feedback sessions (black triangles) and mean correspondence of preference to verbal reports of the choice arrangement with the better odds of winning during No-Rules sessions (white squares) and Rules-with-Feedback sessions (white triangles) for each participant measured across NC, RC, and FC sessions and across all sessions for each participant. (NC  =  No Differential Reinforcement; FC  =  Differential Reinforcement of Free Choice; RC  =  Differential Reinforcement of Restricted Choice).

Figure 6. Choice quotient, point quotient for all trials, point quotient for choice trials, and odds quotient per session for Chloe, Xavier, Edmond, Robert, Lucy, and Alysa (from top to bottom panel, respectively). (NC  =  No Differential Reinforcement; FC  =  Differential Reinforcement of Free Choice; RC  =  Differential Reinforcement of Restricted Choice).