PREFERENCE FOR MIXED VERSUS CONSTANT DELAYS OF REINFORCEMENT: EFFECT OF PROBABILITY OF THE SHORT, MIXED DELAY
- 1 March 1983
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
- Vol. 39 (2) , 257-266
- https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1983.39-257
Abstract
Preference for mixed versus constant delays of reinforcement was studied with a concurrent-chain procedure. Lever pressing by rats in concurrently available variable-interval 60-second initial links occasionally produced mutually exclusive terminal-link reinforcement delays. A constant delay of reinforcement (either 15 seconds or 30 seconds) composed one terminal link and mixed delays (.2 second and twice the value of the constant delay) were arranged in the other terminal link. The proportion of .2-second delays in the mixed-delay terminal link took on values of 0, .1, .25, .5, .75, .9, and 1.0 over experimental conditions. Based on relative rates of responding in the initial links, preference for the mixed delays was a negatively accelerated function of the proportion of short, mixed delays. Three of five rats preferred the mixed delays to the constant delays when the proportion of short, mixed delays was .1 or higher, and all five rats preferred the mixed delays when the proportion of short, mixed delays was .25 or higher. Neither Squires and Fantino's (1971) delay-reduction model of choice nor a model based on the harmonic mean reinforcement delay provided a close estimate of choice proportions over the range of short-delay proportions studied. The delay-reduction model underestimated choice for the mixed delays at low and intermediate proportions of short delays, and the harmonic-mean-delay model overestimated choice for the mixed delays at intermediate and high proportions of short delays.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- CHOICE BETWEEN REWARDS DIFFERING IN AMOUNT AND DELAY: TOWARD A CHOICE MODEL OF SELF CONTROLJournal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1980
- PREFERENCE FOR MIXED VERSUS CONSTANT DELAY OF REINFORCEMENT1Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1976
- THE PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE TO REWARD1Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1972
- PREFERENCE FOR MIXED‐INTERVAL VERSUS FIXED‐INTERVAL SCHEDULES: NUMBER OF COMPONENT INTERVALS1Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1972
- CHOICE FOR PERIODIC SCHEDULES OF REINFORCEMENT1Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1970
- CHOICE AND RATE OF REINFORCEMENT1,2Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1969
- PREFERENCE FOR MIXED‐INTERVAL VERSUS FIXED‐INTERVAL SCHEDULES1Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1969
- A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE RESPONDING MAINTAINED BY INTERVAL SCHEDULES OF REINFORCEMENT1Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1968
- PREFERENCE FOR MIXED‐ VERSUS FIXED‐RATIO SCHEDULES1Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1967
- SECONDARY REINFORCEMENT AND RATE OF PRIMARY REINFORCEMENT1Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1964