Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Concurrent Operant Performance in Humans: Matching When Food is the Reinforcer

  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three human subjects responded for food reinforcers by pulling on either of two doors of a modified vending machine. Participants were exposed to three conditions, each of which contained a different pair of concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules and a changeover delay. All subjects matched both responses and time spent responding to the distribution of reinforcers associated with the schedules. These results confirm the applicability of the matching law in describing human behavior in concurrent operant situations and extend the generality of the matching law to include consummatory behavior in humans.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • BAUM, W.M. 1975. Time allocation in human vigilance, Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 23, 45–53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • BAUM, W.M., & RACHLIN, H.C. 1969. Choice as time allocation. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 861–874.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • BRADSHAW, C. M., SZABADI, E., & BEVAN, P. 1976. Behavior of humans in variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 26, 135–141.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • BRADSHAW, C. M., SZABADI, E., & BEVAN, P. 1979. The effect of punishment on free- operant choice behavior in humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 31, 71–81.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • BRADSHAW, C.M., SZABADI, E., BEVAN, P., & RUDDLE, H.V. 1979. The effect of signaled reinforcement availability on concurrent performances in humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32, 65–74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • BROWNSTEIN, A.J., & PLISKOFF, S.S. 1968. Some effects of relative reinforcement rate and changeover delay in response-independent concurrent schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 11, 683–688.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • BUSKIST, W.F., BENNETT, R.H., & MILLER, H.L. In press. Effects of instructional constraints on human fixed-interval performance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of behavior.

  • DE VILLIERS, P.A. 1977. Choice in concurrent schedules and a quantitative formulation of the law of effect. In W.K. Honig & J.E.R. Staddon (Eds.). Handbook of operant behavior. Englewood, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • FINDLEY, J.D. 1958. Preference and switching under concurrent scheduling. Journal of the Experimen tal A n a lysis of Be ha vior, 1, 123–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • HERRNSTEIN, R.J. 1961. Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 267–272.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • HERRNSTEIN, R.J. 1970. On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243–266.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • HERRNSTEIN, R.J. 1974. Formal properties of the matching law. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 159–164.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • HERRNSTEIN, R.J. 1979. Derivatives of matching. Psychological Review, 86, 486–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MATTHEWS, B.A., SHIMOFF, E., CATANIA, A.C & SAGVOLDEN, T. 1977. Unin- structed human responding: sensitivity to ratio and interval contingencies. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 453–467.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • MCSWEENY, F.K. 1975. Matching and contrast on several concurrent treadle-press schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 23, 193–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OSTLE, B., & MENSING, R.W. 1975. Statistics in research. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • SCHMITT, D.R. 1974. Effects of reinforcement rate and reinforcer magnitude on choice behavior in humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 21, 409–419.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SCHROEDER, S.R., & HOLLAND, J.G. 1969. Reinforcement of eye movement with concurrent schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 897–903.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SHULL, R.L., & PLISKOFF, S.S. 1967. Changeover delay and concurrent schedules: some effects on relative performance measures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 10, 517–527.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • SILBERBERG, A., & FANTINO, E. 1970. Choice, rate of reinforcement, and the changeover delay. Journal of the Experimental A nalysis of Behavior, 13, 187–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Brigham Young University, 1230 SFLC, Provo, UT, 84602, USA

    W. F. Buskist & H. L. Miller Jr.

Authors
  1. W. F. Buskist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. L. Miller Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The research reported herein was supported by a Brigham Young University Faculty Research Grant to the second author.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Buskist, W.F., Miller, H.L. Concurrent Operant Performance in Humans: Matching When Food is the Reinforcer. Psychol Rec 31, 95–100 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394723

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394723

Search

Navigation