Choice between magnitude and percentage or reinforcement.

Spear, Norman E.

doi:10.1037/h0041883

Cited by 23 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(7 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, Ss in Groups 100-33BP and 100-33B continued to run to the formerly CRF alternative on free choice trials even though they had greater forced-trial running speeds to their previously PRF alternative. Related data suggest that this inverse relationship was not an artifact of receiving the free choice only on the first trial of each day-(l) There were no systematic changes in the running-speed relationships from the beginning to the end of the daily session of trials, and (2) When a free trial has been given both early and late in a daily session (for example, Spear, 1964;Spear & Spitzner, 1967) equivalent results have been obtained with either triaL…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Following prehandling and adjustment to the 23-hr. schedule of food deprivation (described by Spear, 1964) for nine days, Ss were run six trials per day for six days each week-acquisition for 55 days (330 trials) and extinction for 15 days (90 trials). The Ss were run in a rotation containing one member from each group resulting in an intertrial interval of about 12 min.…”

Section: Design and Procedurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…When the effect of percentage reinforcement on extinction has been measured within Ss-by comparing relative running speeds in extinction to a stimulus previously associated with partial reinforcement (PRF) and another previously associated with continuous reinforcement (CRF)-the results have been quite different from those obtained with the more common between-S design. The former design has shown that S responds to a stimulus previously associated with CRF with no less, or even greater, resistance to extinction than to a stimulus previously associated with PRF (for example, Spear, 1964;Amsel, 1964;Pavlik, Carlton, & Hughes, 1965). In addition, a uniform increase in resistance to extinction of responding to both CRF and PRF has accompanied this within-S PRE.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

PRE within Ss: Conventional effect on differential speeds, reverse effect on choices

Spear

Spitzner

1967

Psychon Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Design and Procedurementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

PRE within Ss: Conventional effect on differential speeds, reverse effect on choices

Spear

Spitzner

1967

Psychon Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The opposite end of the alleys contained a food reward, which had consistently greater magnitude in one alley compared to the other. Results showed the rats ran faster down the alley associated with the higher magnitude reward (see also Davenport, 1962;Spear, 1964). Even though the rats could not choose the alley on each trial and could not use their behavior to exert any control over the outcome of the trial, they demonstrated greater motivation to navigate to the location with the greater expected value.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do magnitude and frequency of monetary reward guide visual search?

Won

Leber

2016

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does reward guide spatial attention during visual search? In the present study, we examine whether and how two types of reward information-magnitude and frequency-guide search behavior. Observers were asked to find a target among distractors in a search display to earn points. We manipulated multiple levels of value across the search display quadrants in two ways: For reward magnitude, targets appeared equally often in each quadrant, and the value of each quadrant was determined by the average points earned per target; for reward frequency, we varied how often the target appeared in each quadrant but held the average points earned per target constant across the quadrants. In Experiment 1, we found that observers were highly sensitive to the reward frequency information, and prioritized their search accordingly, whereas we did not find much prioritization based on magnitude information. In Experiment 2, we found that magnitude information for a nonspatial feature (color) could bias search performance, showing that the relative insensitivity to magnitude information during visual search is not generalized across all types of information. In Experiment 3, we replicated the negligible use of spatial magnitude information even when we used limited-exposure displays to incentivize the expression of learning. In Experiment 4, we found participants used the spatial magnitude information during a modified choice task-but again not during search. Taken together, these findings suggest that the visual search apparatus does not equally exploit all potential sources of spatial value information; instead, it favors spatial reward frequency information over spatial reward magnitude information.Keywords Visual search . Spatial attention . Spatial probability cueing . Statistical learning . Reward learning Interaction with our spatial environment is inherently goal driven, aimed at maximizing our behavioral outcomes. Consider a fisherman choosing between two equidistant locations to travel to and lower his lines. By a frequency maximization principle, he will pick the location that promises more fish caught in a given interval (all other things being equal). By a magnitude maximization principle, he will pick the location that promises individual fish that are more valuable to him (e.g., larger or tastier). Research has long examined the role of reward frequency and magnitude in learning (Crespi, 1942;Herrnstein, 1961). One classic demonstration of how these factors influence behavioral choice comes from Spear and Pavlik (1966), who used a T-maze procedure. Rats had to run through the Bstem^of the T toward a choice point, where they had to go left versus right to obtain a potential food reward at the end of the chosen arm. The frequency manipulation placed a reward more frequently in one arm than the other; the magnitude manipulation placed rewards equally often but altered the number of food pellets in each arm. Results showed that the rats took advantage of both frequency and magnitude information to maximize thei...

show abstract

“…Other t wo -c ondition-of-reinforcemen t discriminations (or two-component multiple schedules, in the language of operant conditioning) have been studied in the discrete-trial runway situation: continuous reinforcement (CRF) to SI and partial reinforcement (PRF) to 82 (e.g., Amsel, MacKinnon, Rashotte, & Surridge, 1964), as weil as conditions involving differential magnitudes, delays, and percentages of reinforcement to the two stimuli (e.g., Henderson, 1966;MacKinnon, 1967;Spear, 1964;8pear & Pavlik, 1966) Recently, we have reported on rats' performance in a discrimination in which one stimulus signaled CRF while the other signaled discontinuous negatively correlated reinforcement (DNC) (Rashotte & Amsel, 1967, 1968. On a DNC schedule, reinforcement is delivered only when 8 runs more slowly than an arbitrary cutoff speed (Logan, 1960), and we found that during the DNC component of CRF-DNC training rats ran below this speed on about 30% of the trials.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%