Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jul;124(1):e70023.
doi: 10.1002/jeab.70023. Epub 2025 May 19.

Effects of reinforcer probability on attending to element and compound sample stimuli

Eric A Thrailkill  1 , Christopher A Podlesnik  2 , Stacey L Quick  3 , Timothy A Shahan  3
Affiliations

Effects of reinforcer probability on attending to element and compound sample stimuli

Eric A Thrailkill et al. J Exp Anal Behav. 2025 Jul.

Abstract

Previous research has shown that divided-attention performance is sensitive to variations in relative reinforcement in a manner consistent with the generalized matching law. Two experiments with pigeons were designed to better understand the effects of different reinforcement conditions on divided-attention performance. Experiment 1 asked whether separate experience with different relative reinforcement probabilities for elements alone would produce changes in performance during nondifferentially reinforced divided-attention trials with compound samples consisting of those elements. The results suggest that accuracy following compound sample trials varied as a function of relative reinforcement experienced in element trials in a manner consistent with the matching law. Experiment 2 used an adjusting-sample-duration procedure to maintain constant accuracy on element and divided-attention trials and varied the probability of reinforcement across conditions. The sample durations that were required to maintain constant accuracy increased as reinforcement probability decreased even though that longer sample durations were required to maintain accuracy for compound-sample trials than for element-sample trials (the element-superiority effect). Overall, the present results are consistent with the notion that increased attention is allocated to stimuli that are associated with more reinforcement.

Keywords: DMTS; divided attention; matching law; pigeon; probability; reinforcement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Schematic of matching‐to‐sample procedures arranged in Experiments 1 and 2. Example trials are shown for element (a.) and compound (b.) trials. See text for additional details of the procedure.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Results of Experiment 1 with GML fit. The panels show relative accuracy (see text for details) from the three experimental conditions that varied relative reinforcement for accuracy on color and line element trials. Relative reinforcement was always .50 on compound trials. The regression equations and R 2 values were calculated using Equation 2.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Results of Experiment 1 GML analyses.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Results of Experiment 2. Individual panels plot the mean obtained sample duration (a.) and accuracy (b.) from each probability of reinforcement condition. Data points for the .05 and .10 conditions show the mean of the final 20 sessions. The .50 condition was replicated, and the data points show the mean collapsed over the final 20 sessions of each replication (40 sessions in total). Error bars are 95% confidence intervals.
FIGURE A1
FIGURE A1
Results of Experiment 1. Individual log d values for color and line comparisons in element and compound trials.
FIGURE A2
FIGURE A2
Results of Experiment 1. Obtained reinforcement totals from element and compound trials.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Alsop, B. (2004). Signal‐detection analyses of conditional discrimination and delayed matching‐to‐sample performance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 82(1), 57–69. 10.1901/jeab.2004.82-57 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Anderson, B. A. , Laurent, P. A. , & Yantis, S. (2011). Value‐driven attentional capture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(25), 10367–10371. 10.1073/pnas.1104047108 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baum, W. M. (1979). Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32(2), 269–281. 10.1901/jeab.1979.32-269 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baum, W. M. (2004). Molar and molecular views of choice. Behavioural Processes, 66(3), 349–359. 10.1016/j.beproc.2004.03.013 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blough, D. S. (1959). Delayed matching in the pigeon. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2(2), 151–160. 10.1901/jeab.1959.2-151 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources