Skip to main content
Log in

Suboptimal Choice by Pigeons: Evidence that the Value of the Conditioned Reinforcer Rather than its Frequency Determines Choice

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In an analog of human gambling, pigeons prefer a suboptimal alternative that infrequently provides a signal that is reliably associated with reinforcement over the more optimal alternative that yields more reinforcement. We hypothesized that pigeons are sensitive to the conditioned reinforcement that accrues to the stimulus associated with the greatest probability of reinforcement, independent of the frequency of its occurrence. In the present experiment we tested that hypothesis in a between groups design. For Group 50/75, choice of the suboptimal alternative 50 % of the time resulted in presentation of a stimulus that was always associated with reinforcement. For Group 25/75, choice of the suboptimal alternative 25 % of the time resulted in presentation of a stimulus that was always associated with reinforcement. For both groups, choice of the optimal alternative always resulted in presentation of a stimulus associated with 75 % reinforcement. In support of our hypothesis, both groups chose suboptimally and at the same rate. These results suggest that the conditioned reinforcing properties of the signal for reinforcement are acquired through its reliability as a signal for reinforcement and the frequency of its occurrence is of little importance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Belke, T. W., & Spetch, M. L. (1994). Choice between reliable and unreliable reinforcement alternatives revisited: preference for unreliable reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 62, 353–366.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blanco, C., Ibáñez, A., Sáiz-Ruiz, J., Blanco-Jerez, C., & Nunes, E. (2000). Epidemiology, pathophysiology and treatment of pathological gambling. CNS Drugs, 13, 397–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinsmoor, J. A. (1983). Observing and conditioned reinforcement. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6, 693–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fantino, E. (1969). Choice and rate of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 723–730.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fantino, E., Dunn, R., & Meck, W. (1979). Percentage reinforcement and choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32, 335–340.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gallistel, C. R. (2009). The importance of proving the null. Psychological Review, 116, 439–453.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gipson, C. D., Alessandri, J. D., Miller, H. C., & Zentall, T. R. (2009). Preference for 50 % reinforcement over 75 % reinforcement by pigeons. Learning & Behavior, 37, 289–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laude, J. R., Beckmann, J. S., Daniels, C. W., & Zentall, T. R. (2014a). Impulsivity affects gambling-like choice by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 40, 2–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laude, J. R., Stagner, J. P., & Zentall, T. R. (2014b). Suboptimal choice by pigeons may result from the diminishing effect of nonreinforcement. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 40, 12–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, J. E. (1996). Choice with certain and uncertain reinforcers in an adjusting delay procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 66, 63–73.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roper, K. L., & Zentall, T. R. (1999). Observing behavior in pigeons: the effect of reinforcement probability and response cost using a symmetrical choice procedure. Learning and Motivation, 30, 201–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouder, J. N., Speckman, P. L., Sun, D., Morey, R. D., & Iverson, G. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 225–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spetch, M. L., Belke, T. W., Barnet, R. C., Dunn, R., & Pierce, W. D. (1990). Suboptimal choice in a percentage-reinforcement procedure: effects of signal condition and terminal link length. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 53, 219–234.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spetch, M. L., Mondloch, M. V., Belke, T. W., & Dunn, R. (1994). Determinants of pigeons’ choice between certain and probabilistic outcomes. Animal Learning & Behavior, 22, 239–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stagner, J. P., Laude, J. R., & Zentall, T. R. (2012). Pigeons prefer discriminative stimuli independently of the overall probability of reinforcement and of the number of presentations of the conditioned reinforcer. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Animal Behavior Processes, 38, 446–452.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stagner, J. P., & Zentall, T. R. (2010). Suboptimal choice behavior by pigeons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 412–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zentall, T. R., & Stagner, J. P. (2011a). Maladaptive choice behavior by pigeons: an animal analog of gambling (sub-optimal human decision making behavior). Proceedings of the Royal Society B:Biological Sciences, 278, 1203–1208.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zentall, T. R., & Stagner, J. P. (2011b). Sub-optimal choice by pigeons: failure to support the Allais paradox. Learning and Motivation, 42, 245–254.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas R. Zentall.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zentall, T.R., Laude, J.R., Stagner, J.P. et al. Suboptimal Choice by Pigeons: Evidence that the Value of the Conditioned Reinforcer Rather than its Frequency Determines Choice. Psychol Rec 65, 223–229 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-015-0119-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-015-0119-2

Keywords

Navigation