Abstract
A method is described for simulating the variability of outcomes encountered in a variety of settings. Outcome values falling within a specified range are randomly generated and presented across subjects and trials, so that, over time, the average values seen by all subjects in a condition are the same. Randomly varying reinforcement dimensions (such as magnitude) over trials for each subject is recommended to enhance both the internal and the external validity of laboratory results. In addition, it can be used to study the effects of the variability or uncertainty of outcome dimensions such as magnitude and duration in investigations of behaviors such as matching, melioration, and behavioral momentum.
References
Abramowitz, M., &Stegun, I. A. (1964).Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs and mathematical tables. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
Bowen, M. G. (1989). The escalation of phenomenon reconsidered: Decision dilemmas or decision errors?Academy of Management Review,12, 52–66.
Bragger, J. D.,Bragger, D.,Hantula, D. A., &Kirnan, J. (in press). Hysteresis and uncertainty: The effect of uncertainty on delays to exit decisions.Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes.
Catania, A. C., &Reynolds, G. S. (1968). A quantitative analysis of the responding maintained by interval schedules of reinforcement.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,11, 327–383.
Chayer-Farrell, L., &Freedman, N. L. (1987). CORE: Computercontrolled operant reinforcement.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,19, 319–326.
Cook, T. D., &Campbell, D. T. (1979).Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Fantino, E. (1967). Preference for mixed-versus fixed-ratios.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,10, 35–43.
Fetterman, J. G. (1994, May).An experimental synthesis of timing and counting processes. Paper presented at the Conference of the Society for the Quantitative Analyses of Behavior.
Fleshler, M., &Hoffman, H. S. (1962). A progression for generating variable-interval schedules.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,5, 529–530.
Goltz, S. M. (1992). A sequential learning analysis of continued investments of organizational resources in nonperforming courses of action.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,25, 561–574.
Goltz, S. M. (1993). Examining the joint roles of responsibility and reinforcement history in recommitment.Decision Sciences,24, 977–994.
Goltz, S. M. (in press). Can’t stop on a dime: The roles of matching and momentum in persistence of commitment.Journal of Organizational Behavior Management.
Grace, R. C., &Nevin, J. A. (1997). On the relation between preference and resistance to change.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,67, 43–65.
Hale, S. S., Myerson, J., &Miezin, F. M. (1982). Top-down design for a system to control operant choice experiments.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,14, 272–275.
Hantula, D. A. (1991). A BASIC program for generating values for variable interval schedules of reinforcement.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,24, 799–801.
Hantula, D. A., &Crowell, C. R. (1994a). Behavioral contrast in a two-option analogue task of financial decision making.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,27, 607–617.
Hantula, D. A., &Crowell, C. R. (1994b). Intermittent reinforcement and escalation processes in sequential decision making: A replication and theoretical analysis.Journal of Organizational Behavior Management,14, 7–36.
Herrnstein, R. J. (1964). Aperiodicity as a factor in choice.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,7, 179–182.
Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,13, 243–266.
Herrnstein, R. J. (1982). Melioration as behavioral dynamism. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, & H. Rachlin (Eds.),Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol. 2. Matching and maximizing accounts (pp. 433–458). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Hirshleifer, J., &Glazer, A. (1992).Price theory and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hull, J. C. (1993).Options, futures, and other derivative securities (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Knuth, D. (1981).The art of programming: Semi-numerical algorithms (2nd ed., Vol. 2). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Lewin, M. (1979).Understanding psychological research. New York: Wiley.
Maisel, H., &Gnugnoli, G. (1972).Simulation of discrete stochastic systems. Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates.
Mellon, R. C., &Shull, R. L. (1986). Resistance to change produced by access to fixed-delay vs. variable delay terminal links.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,46, 79–92.
Nevin, J. A. (1988). Behavioral momentum and the partial reinforcement effect.Psychological Bulletin,108, 44–56.
Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T., &Flannery, B. P. (1992).Numerical recipes in C: The art of scientific computing (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rachlin, H. (1973). Contrast and matching.Psychological Review,80, 217–234.
Rider, D. P. (1983). Preference for mixed versus constant delays of reinforcement: Effect of probability of the short, mixed delay.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,39, 257–266.
Staw, B. M. (1996). The escalation of commitment: An update and appraisal. In Z. Shapira (Ed.),Organizational decision making (pp. 191–215). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Young, J. S. (1981). Discrete-trial choice in pigeons: Effects of reinforcer magnitude.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,35, 23–29.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Goltz, S.M., Northey, J.E. Simulating the variability of actual outcomes. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 30, 680–689 (1998). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209487
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209487
Keywords
- Random Number Generator
- Reinforcement Effect
- NEVIN
- Experimental Analysis ofBehavior
- Behavioral Momentum