Abstract
Pigeons responded on concurrent-chain schedules with variable-interval initial links and equal delays as terminal links. The terminal-link delays were 1 sec in some conditions and 20 sec in other conditions. The percentages of reinforcers delivered for responses on the left key were 10%, 30%, 70%, or 90%, and this percentage was switched every five to nine sessions. The rate of change in the pigeons’ response percentages after a switch was the same whether the terminal-link delays were 1 sec or 20 sec. Analysis of the effects of individual reinforcers showed that after a response on one key had been reinforced, response percentages on that key were higher for at least the next 100 responses. Small effects of individual reinforcers were evident after eight or nine additional reinforcers had been delivered. The effects of individual reinforcers were about equally large during times of transition and during periods in which overall response percentages were relatively stable.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bailey, J. T., &Mazur, J. E. (1990). Choice behavior in transition: Development of preference for the higher probability of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,53, 409–422.
Bush, R. R., &Mosteller, F. (1955).Stochastic models for learning. New York: Wiley.
Couvillon, P. A., &Bitterman, M. E. (1985). Analysis of choice in honeybees.Animal Learning & Behavior,13, 246–252.
Davison, M., &Baum, W. M. (2000). Choice in a variable environment: Every reinforcer counts.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,74, 1–24.
Devenport, J. A., &Devenport, L. D. (1993). Time-dependent decisions in dogs (Canis familiaris).Journal of Comparative Psychology,107, 169–173.
Dragoi, V., &Staddon, J. E. R. (1999). The dynamics of operant conditioning.Psychological Review,106, 20–61.
Dreyfus, L. R. (1991). Local shifts in relative reinforcement rate and time allocation on concurrent schedules.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,17, 486–502.
Estes, W. K. (1950). Toward a statistical theory of learning.Psychological Review,57, 94–107.
Fantino, E. (1969). Choice and rate of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,12, 723–730.
Fantino, E., &Davison, M. (1983). Choice: Some quantitative relations.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,40, 1–13.
Fantino, E., &Royalty, P. (1987). A molecular analysis of choice on concurrent-chain schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,48, 145–159.
Fischer, M. E., Couvillon, P. A., &Bitterman, M. E. (1993). Choice in honeybees as a function of the probability of reward.Animal Learning & Behavior,21, 187–195.
Grace, R. (1994). A contextual model of concurrent-chains choice.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,61, 113–129.
Grace, R. (2002). Acquisition of preference in concurrent chains: Comparing linear-operator and memory-representational models.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,28, 257–276.
Killeen, P. R. (1970). Preference for fixed-interval schedules of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,14, 127–131.
Killeen, P. R. (1982). Incentive theory: II. Models for choice.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,38, 217–234.
Killeen, P. R. (1994). Mathematical principles of reinforcement.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,17, 105–172.
MacEwen, D. (1972). The effects of terminal-link fixed-interval and variable-interval schedules on responding under concurrent-chained schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,18, 253–261.
Mark, T. A., &Gallistel, C. R. (1994). Kinetics of matching.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,20, 79–95.
Mazur, J. E. (1992). Choice behavior in transition: Development of preference with ratio and interval schedules.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,18, 364–378.
Mazur, J. E. (2000). Two- versus three-alternative concurrent-chain schedules: A test of three models.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,26, 286–293.
Mazur, J. E. (2001). Hyperbolic value addition and general models of animal choice.Psychological Review,108, 96–112.
Mazur, J. E., Blake, N., &McManus, C. (2001). Transitional choice behavior in concurrent-chain schedules.Behavioural Processes,53, 171–180.
Menlove, R. L. (1975). Local patterns of responding maintained by concurrent and multiple schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,23, 309–337.
Savastano, H. I., &Fantino, E. (1996). Differences in delay, not ratios, control choice in concurrent chains.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,66, 97–116.
Squires, N., &Fantino, E. (1971). A model for choice in simple concurrent and concurrent-chains schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,15, 27–38.
Stubbs, D. A., &Pliskoff, S. S. (1969). Concurrent responding with fixed relative rate of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,12, 887–895.
Vaughan, W. (1985). Choice: A local analysis.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,43, 383–405.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant MH 38357 from the National Institute of Mental Health. I thank Diane Coe, Heidi Goodby, Phong Voong, and Joel Yudt for their help in various phases of the research.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mazur, J.E. Concurrent-chain performance in transition: Effects of terminal-link duration and individual reinforcers. Animal Learning & Behavior 30, 249–260 (2002). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192834
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192834