Control by reinforcers across time and space: A review of recent choice research

In the context of evolutionary theory, behavior is the interaction between the organism and its environment. Two implications follow: (a) behavior takes time; and (b) behavior is defined by its function. That behavior takes time implies that behavioral units are temporally extended patterns or activities. An activity functions as an integrated whole composed of parts that are themselves smaller‐scale activities. That behavior is defined by its function implies that behavior functions to change the environment in ways that promote reproductive success. Phylogenetically important events (PIEs) are enhanced or mitigated by activities they induce as a result of natural selection. Induction explains all the phenomena that have traditionally been explained by reinforcement. This multiscale view replaces discrete responses and contiguity with multiscale activities and covariance. A PIE induces operant activity as a result of covariance in the form of a feedback relation between the activity and the PIE. A signal (conditional inducer) induces PIE‐induced activities as a result of covariance between the PIE and the signal. In an ontological perspective, behavior is a process, and an activity is a process individual. For example, ontological considerations clarify the status of delay and probability discounting. A true natural science of behavior is possible.

Section: Reinforcement and Inductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiscale behavior analysis and molar behaviorism: An overview

Baum

2018

“…When one environmental event usually precedes other events, this marker event signposts (Shahan, ) the likely future because of its correlation with subsequent events. It is this correlation that exerts control over behavior (Baum, ; Cowie, ; Cowie & Davison, ), provided the future conditions signposted by the marker event are important in the context of the organism's current affordances, dispositions (Killeen & Jacobs, ), or phylogenetic history (Baum, ; Cowie & Davison, ). This sort of control by correlations that have occurred across an organism's learning history is often termed stimulus control .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Control by correlations also depends on the reinforcers that form part of those correlations (see Cowie & Davison, , for a review). When the availability of reinforcers changes between locations at a particular time, differences in the percentage of reinforcers obtained before and after that time cause reliable differences in the pattern of choice across time, despite the correlation between time and reinforcer location remaining unchanged (Bizo & White, ; Cowie, Bizo & White, ; Stubbs, ; ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Being there on time: Reinforcer effects on timing and locating

Cowie

Davison

2020

Self Cite

In research on timing, reinforcers often are assumed to influence discrimination of elapsed time. We asked whether changes in choice used to measure timing arise because of joint control by elapsed time and reinforcers, rather than from the direct modification of control by elapsed time by reinforcers. Pigeons worked on a concurrent‐choice task in which 1 response was 9 times more likely to produce a reinforcer, reversing between locations when 19 s had elapsed since the marker event. Across conditions, we manipulated the percentage of reinforcers arranged before the probability reversal from 5 to 95%. These changes in reinforcer percentages altered control by location‐based elements of the contingency, but not by time‐based elements. Choice was well described by a model that assumes that control by the contingency is weakened by generalization across the time and location of reinforcers, and that these generalizations become more likely at later times since a marker. These findings add to a growing body of research that suggests that reinforcers share the same function as other environmental events in determining how the environment controls behavior.

“…Instead, the results could be interpreted as a stimulus control effect (see Baum, ; Cowie & Davison, ; Reid, ). In the initial parts of the present experiment, when the participant received the first reinforcer for interacting with a new object, this was followed by at least 10 more reinforcers for interacting with that object, as well as reinforcement for performing different actions with the object.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cowie and colleagues (Cowie, Davison, & Elliffe, , ; Cowie, Elliffe, & Davison, ), for example, have shown that a reinforcer for Response A may result in an immediate increase in Response B, if the reinforcer predicts that the next reinforcer will more likely be delivered for Response B. According to Cowie and Davison (), it may be better to conceptualize reinforcement as a stimulus control effect, rather than as a strengthening effect (see also Baum, ). These studies have extended Reid's () finding that a reinforcer may increase behavior because of its discriminative properties.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The power of one reinforcer: The effect of a single reinforcer in the context of shaping

Hunter

Rosales‐Ruiz

2019

During shaping, if the organism is engaged in behaviors other than the current approximation, the amount of time between reinforcers increases. In these situations, the shaper may resort to what is referred to as a “desperation‐driven click.” That is, after a period of no reinforcement, the shaper delivers one reinforcer for a nontarget approximation. Reports from professional animal trainers suggest that the animal may continue performing this new behavior, even if it is reinforced only once. This study attempted to model this phenomenon with college students. Results from the study demonstrated that a desperation‐driven click situation can be reliably produced in a controlled setting. When participants received one reinforcer for interacting with a new object following a period of no reinforcement, they interacted with the new object for a longer or equal amount of time as compared to an object that had a longer history of reinforcement. The results of this study have implications for the understanding of how reinforcement controls behavior.