Concurrent schedules of response-independent reinforcement: Duration of a reinforcing stimulus
Open accessAbstract
Presentations of grain to three pigeons were determined by two response-independent schedules. Interpresentation intervals varied with a mean interval of 1.5 min for each schedule. Both were concurrently operative, but grain was presented by one only when the chamber was illuminated with blue light and by the other only during amber illumination. A response on a white key, the only key in the chamber, alternated the stimulus conditions and the effective schedule. Grain presentation durations associated with the illumination conditions were varied from 1.5 to 4.5 sec. The proportion of the total session time spent in an illumination condition closely approximated the relative grain presentation duration provided in that illumination. For two of the birds, the proportion of the total number of grain presentations obtained in an illumination condition was an increasng function of the presentation duration in that illumination.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Regarding high sensitivity to magnitude, published data are varied, with observations of near-strict matching as well as undermatching.
“Regarding the high sensitivity to magnitude, the published data are varied, with observations of near-strict matching (Brownstein, 1971; Keller & Gollub, 1977; Neuringer, 1967) as well as undermatching (Schneider, 1973; Todorov, 1973) being reported.”
From DYNAMIC RESPONSE-BY-RESPONSE MODELS OF MATCHING BEHAVIOR IN RHESUS MONKEYS (2005) · cites this paper as Brownstein, 1971
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Operant Behavior: Areas of Research and Application,
Honig, W. K. (1966) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,656 · see citing works
Herrnstein, R. J. (1961) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1961.4-267 · Cited by 2,281 · see citing works
Baum, W. M., & Rachlin, H. C. (1969) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1969.12-861 · Cited by 737 · see citing works
CONCURRENT PERFORMANCES: A BASELINE FOR THE STUDY OF REINFORCEMENT MAGNITUDE1
Catania, A. C. (1963) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1963.6-299 · Cited by 301 · see citing works
CONCURRENT PERFORMANCES: REINFORCEMENT INTERACTION AND RESPONSE INDEPENDENCE1
Catania, A. C. (1963) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1963.6-253 · Cited by 234 · see citing works
EFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT MAGNITUDE ON CHOICE AND RATE OF RESPONDING<sup>1</sup>
Neuringer, A. J. (1967) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1967.10-417 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Brownstein, A. J., & Pliskoff, S. S. (1968) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1968.11-683 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
RESPONSE RATE AS A FUNCTION OF AMOUNT OF REINFORCEMENT FOR A SIGNALLED CONCURRENT RESPONSE1
Rachlin, H. C., & Baum, W. M. (1969) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1969.12-11 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Baum, W. M. and Rachlin, H. Choice as time alloca- tion. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Be- havior, 1969, 12, 861-874.
- Catania, A. C. Concurrent performances: reinforce- ment interaction and response independence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1963, 6, 253-263.
- Herrnstein, R. J. Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforce- ment. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1961, 4, 267-272.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
DYNAMIC RESPONSE-BY-RESPONSE MODELS OF MATCHING BEHAVIOR IN RHESUS MONKEYS
Lau, B., & Glimcher, P. W. (2005) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.2005.110-04 · Cited by 485 · see citing works
Self-control and general models of choice.
Navarick, D. J., & Fantino, E. J. (1976) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Animal Behavior Processes · doi:10.1037/0097-7403.2.1.75 · Cited by 253 · see citing works
CHOICE BETWEEN REWARDS DIFFERING IN AMOUNT AND DELAY: TOWARD A CHOICE MODEL OF SELF CONTROL
Green, L., & Snyderman, M. (1980) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1980.34-135 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Myers, D. L., & Myers, L. E. (1977) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1977.27-203 · Cited by 147 · see citing works
PREFERENCE FOR QUALITATIVELY DIFFERENT REINFORCERS1
Hollard, V. D., & Davison, M. (1971) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1971.16-375 · Cited by 136 · see citing works
Schneider, J. W. (1973) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1973.20-461 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
TIME ALLOCATION IN HUMAN VIGILANCE 1
Baum, W. M. (1975) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1975.23-45 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
INTERACTION OF FREQUENCY AND MAGNITUDE OF REINFORCEMENT ON CONCURRENT PERFORMANCES1
Todorov, J. C. (1973) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1973.19-451 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
CONCURRENT PERFORMANCES: REINFORCEMENT BY DIFFERENT DOSES OF INTRAVENOUS COCAINE IN RHESUS MONKEYS1
Iglauer, C., & Woods, J. H. (1974) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1974.22-179 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
INCENTIVE THEORY: IV. MAGNITUDE OF REWARD
Killeen, P. R. (1985) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1985.43-407 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
On the theoretical and empirical status of the matching law and matching theory.
McDowell, J. J. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0029924 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
“The results of early experiments indicated that Equation 1 described relative responding, with response rate as the specific property of behavior, when reinforcer magnitude (Baum, 1966, cited in Chung & Hermstein, 1967; Brownstein, 1971; Catania, 1963a; de Villiers & Millenson, 1972; Fantino, Squires, Delbmck, & Peter…”
ResultElucidating the effects of reinforcement magnitude.
Bonem, M. K., & Crossman, E. K. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.104.3.348 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
CHOICE BEHAVIOR AND THE ACCESSIBILITY OF THE REINFORCER1
Fantino, E. J., Squires, N. K., Delbrück, N., & Peterson, C. (1972) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1972.18-35 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
PREFERENCE IN RHESUS MONKEYS GIVEN A CHOICE BETWEEN COCAINE AND d,l‐CATHINONE
Woolverton, W. L., & Johanson, C. E. (1984) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1984.41-35 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Independence of the amount and delay ratios in the generalized matching law
Rodríguez, M., & Logue, A. W. (1986) · Animal Learning & Behavior · doi:10.3758/bf03200034 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
DISCRETE‐TRIAL CHOICE IN PIGEONS: EFFECTS OF REINFORCER MAGNITUDE
Young, J. S. (1981) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1981.35-23 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
A YOKED‐CHAMBER COMPARISON OF CONCURRENT AND MULTIPLE SCHEDULES
Killeen, P. R. (1972) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1972.18-13 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Self-control and impulsiveness involving aversive events.
Deluty, M. Z. (1978) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Animal Behavior Processes · doi:10.1037/0097-7403.4.3.250 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Carroll, M. E. (1985) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1985.43-131 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
“Concurrent schedules have been used extensively for assessing response-strengthening effects of reinforcer magnitudes (Brownstein, 1971; Catania, 1963, 1966; Herrnstein, 1970; Rachlin & Baum, 1969).”
BackgroundEFFECTS OF REINFORCEMENT RATE AND REINFORCER MAGNITUDE ON CHOICE BEHAVIOR OF HUMANS1
Schmitt, D. R. (1974) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1974.21-409 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
TIME‐BASED AND COUNT‐BASED MEASUREMENT OF PREFERENCE1
Baum, W. M. (1976) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1976.26-27 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Llewellyn, M. E., Iglauer, C., & Woods, J. H. (1976) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1976.25-81 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
CHOICE, RELATIVE REINFORCER DURATION, AND THE CHANGEOVER RATIO
Dunn, R. M. (1982) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1982.38-313 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Weiss, S. J. (1978) · Journal of The Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1978.30-361 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
DURATION AND RATE OF REINFORCEMENT AS DETERMINANTS OF CONCURRENT RESPONDING1
Keller, J. V., & Gollub, L. R. (1977) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1977.28-145 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Pear, J. J., & Rector, B. L. (1979) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1979.32-341 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Ecott, C. L., & Critchfield, T. S. (2004) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1901/jaba.2004.37-249 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
“Consider a study in which pigeons could stand at either end of a rectangular chamber, where feeders were programmed to provide food on variable-time schedules (Baum & Rachlin, 1969; for similar procedures, see Brownstein, 1971; Brownstein & Pliskoff, 1968).”
BackgroundCUNCURRENT SCHEDULES: INTERACTION OF REINFORCER FREQUENCY AND REINFORCER DURATION
Davison, M. (1988) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1988.49-339 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Matching to Reinforcer Value: Human Concurrent Variable-Interval Performance
Cliffe, M. J., & Parry, S. J. (1980) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/14640748008401845 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
CONCURRENT VARIABLE‐INTERVAL SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE: FIXED VERSUS MIXED REINFORCER DURATIONS
Davison, M., & Hogsden, I. (1984) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1984.41-169 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
“The relationship he found was confirmed by Brownstein (1971), who measured B as time allocation with no explicit response being required to obtain reinforcers. Todorov (1973) used a procedure in which three pairs of concurrent VI VI schedules, differing in both reinforcer rates and durations, were arranged in each sch…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialCarroll, M. E. (1987) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/bf02439578 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
“These findings are consistent with results of previous studies that compared different magnitudes of food (Catania 1963; Rachlin and Baum 1969; Herrnstein 1970; Brownstein 1971) or sucrose (Schrier 1963; Collier and Bolles 1968; Samson and Lindberg 1984) reinforcers under concurrent schedules.”
Auge, R. J. (1973) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1973.20-429 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
MATCHING UNDER NONINDEPENDENT VARIABLE‐RATIO SCHEDULES OF DRUG REINFORCEMENT
Meisch, R. A., & Spiga, R. (1998) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1998.70-23 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
“For example, although the passage of time does contribute to the completion of the concurrent VI VI schedules, the passage of time is neither the contingent response nor the dependent measure (for two exceptions, see Baum & Rachlin, 1969, and Brownstein, 1971).”
BackgroundTIME ALLOCATION IN CONCURRENT SCHEDULES: THE EFFECT OF SIGNALLED REINFORCEMENT1
Marcucella, H., & Margolius, G. (1978) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1978.29-419 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Choice and amount of reinforcement in rats
Ito, M. (1985) · Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/0023-9690(85)90006-2 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Carroll, M. E. (1987) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1987.47-347 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
TIME ALLOCATION ON CONCURRENT SCHEDULES WITH ASYMMETRICAL RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS1
Bauman, R. A., Shull, R. L., & Brownstein, A. J. (1975) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1975.24-53 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
A quantitative analysis of the effects of amount of reinforcement on two response classes.
Osborne, S. R. (1978) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Animal Behavior Processes · doi:10.1037//0097-7403.4.4.297 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
SHORT‐COMPONENT MULTIPLE SCHEDULES: EFFECTS OF RELATIVE REINFORCEMENT DURATION1
Merigan, W. H., Miller, J. S., & Gollub, L. R. (1975) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1975.24-183 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
da Silva, S. P., & Lattal, K. A. (2010) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.2010.93-395 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“The use of reinforcement magnitudes to alter choice between concurrently available alternatives can be traced to Catania (1963) who exposed pigeons to concurrent variableinterval (VI) VI reinforcement schedules and manipulated the duration of grain presentations correlated with each key across conditions to produce ac…”
BackgroundDepression as a model for behavioral analysis
Moss, G. R., & Boren, J. J. (1972) · Comprehensive Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/0010-440x(72)90059-4 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
PIGEONS RESPOND TO PRODUCE PERIODS IN WHICH REWARDS ARE INDEPENDENT OF RESPONDING1
Neuringer, A. J. (1973) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1973.19-39 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Concurrent Classical Conditioning
Henton, W. W. (1981) · The Psychological Record · doi:10.1007/bf03394752 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Choice between shock-free times in concurrent avoidance schedules
Lewis, P., Moon, L., & Hutton, L. V. (1976) · Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society · doi:10.3758/bf03335178 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Concurrent schedules of response duration
Lachter, G. D. (1984) · Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society · doi:10.3758/bf03333844 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Non-Contingent Reinforcement in Concurrent Chain Schedules
Lachter, G. D. (1973) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1973.33.1.215 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Preference Reversal: Effects of Ratio and Reinforcement Parameters
Stephens, K. R. (1980) · ScholarWorks - WMU (Western Michigan University) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
(1984) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1984.41-i35 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
On an empirical calculus of reinforcement magnitude
Cliffe, M. J. (1977) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/bf01541131
“Within its framework, it is now possible to state quantitative laws about the reinforcing properties of different rates (Herrnstein, 1961, t970), delays (Chung, 1965; Chung and Herrnstein, 1967), and magnitudes (Catania, 1963; Brownstein, 1971) of a single type of reinforcer.”
BackgroundThe value of signals for reward: Choice in concurrent chains
Mattson, K. M. (2005) · UC Research Repository (University of Canterbury) · doi:10.26021/5640
Sensitivity of preference to reinforcement amount depends upon the method used to manipulate amount
Maguire, D. R. (2009) · NC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro)
The Effects of Signaled Reinforcer Duration on Preference
Oliver, A. C. (2017) · doi:10.33915/etd.6347
“…of hopper access duration have been reported (e.g., Catania, 1963), but in others there has been a positive relation between reinforcer duration and response rate (e.g., Catania, 1963), behavioral allocation (Brownstein, 1971), or choice for the longer-duration reinforcer (e.g., Neuringer, 1967).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialTables of Contents, Volumes 1-20
(1975) · Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior · doi:10.1901/jeab.1975.23-i111
- Authors
- Brownstein, A. J.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Greensboro (US)
- Corresponding author
- Brownstein, Aaron J.
- Venue
- Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1971-03
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 211-214
- ISSN
- 0022-5002 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-3711
- PMC
- PMC1333803
- OpenAlex
- W1968439183
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2017: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 10.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Keywords
- concurrent schedules, response-independent reinforcement, stimulus duration, stimulus control, pigeons, reinforcement schedules
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review