Effects of Fixed and Variable Ratios on Human Behavioral Variability

Tatham, Thomas A.; Wanchisen, Barbara A.; Hineline, Philip N.

doi:10.1901/jeab.1993.59-349

Cited by 33 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, this hypothesis would predict greater schedule-induced variability during variable schedules than during fixed schedules. Tatham et al (1993) did not find differential amounts of schedule-induced variability when comparing equal ratio values of fixed-and variable-ratio schedules. However, a relatively small range of values was investigated, and the effects of other manipulations may have overshadowed small effects.…”

Section: An Account Of the Differential Effects Of Schedule Periodicimentioning

confidence: 57%

“…They found increasing degrees of variability in the location of drawing an "X" when positive feedback was given on CRF, intermittent, and extinction schedules, respectively. Tatham, Winchisen, and Hineline (1993) investigated the effects of a range of fixed-and variable-ratio values on response sequences emitted on two available push buttons by college students. Patterns of sequences consisting of eight total responses were observed during ratio values of 1, 2, 4, and 8.…”

Section: Reinforcer Density and Intermittencymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Schedule-Induced and Operant Mechanisms that Influence Response Variability: A Review and Implications for Future Investigations

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response variability, a fundamental characteristic of behavior, may be in some cases an induced effect of reinforcement schedules. Research on schedule-induced response variability has shown that continuous reinforcement results in less variability than intermittent reinforcement schedules. Studies on the effects of intermittency of reinforcement, periodicity of reinforcement, and type of schedule have resulted in mixed findings. Contingencies have also been arranged to directly influence operant response variability. These include lag reinforcement schedules, differential reinforcement of novel behavior, differential reinforcement of less frequent behavior, and percentile reinforcement schedules. These procedures are discussed in terms of practicality and implications for use in applied settings. Contingencies and treatment packages that indirectly influence response variability are addressed in terms of response allocation, response generalization, and response covariation. Studies on the effects of a variety of other variables on response variability are also reported, such as levels of food deprivation and drugs. Finally, directions for applied research in response variability are suggested.Traditionally, behavioral variability has been considered an intrinsic, uncontrollable characteristic of behavior or a result of unforeseen, uncontrolled variables (Neuringer, 2002). As a result, the identification of methods to reduce the effects of potential sources of variability has been an important component of much research (Sidman, 1960). Alternatively, behavioral variability itself has been a recent topic of research and can have important implications, both theoretical and practical. From a theoretical perspective, such research has provided behavior analysts with a basis for the investigation of topics considered to be out of the realm of learning theory, such as creativity and originality (Marr, 2003). From a practical standpoint, the identification of conditions that lead to, maintain, or decrease response variability should aid in the refinement of existing practices and the development of new procedures that help reduce stereotypy among the clinical population. Such procedures could 430 LEE ET AL. be used to increase generative language, problem-solving skills, creative play, and normalistic social interactions.Although a behavior analysis of creative behavior is difficult, it is not new. Maltzman (1960) provided one of the earlier reviews of research in which people were taught "original" behavior. More recently, Shahan and Chase (2002) provided a review of behavioral concepts (e.g., adduction) that influence response variability and discussed how they relate to creativity and language. The concepts included stimulus generalization, conceptual behavior, and verbal operants. Neuringer (2002) provided an in-depth review of various procedures, noted their implications for treatment in applied settings, and discussed the sources of variability. Marr (2003) has recently rebutted traditional criticisms of a beha...

show abstract

Section: An Account Of the Differential Effects Of Schedule Periodicimentioning

confidence: 57%

Section: Reinforcer Density and Intermittencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Schedule-Induced and Operant Mechanisms that Influence Response Variability: A Review and Implications for Future Investigations

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This result cannot be entirely explained by reinforcement intermittency during this phase because intermittency is predicted to induce lower variability levels than withholding reinforcement (e.g., Eckerman & Vreeland, 1973;Tatham, Wanchisen, & Hineline, 1993). Another complementary explanation comes from the phenomenon of superstitious behavior-that is, responses conditioned or maintained by their adventitious contiguity with reinforcers (Neuringer, 1970;Ono, 1987;Skinner, 1948).…”

Section: Final Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

History effects on induced and operant variability

Souza

Abreu‐Rodrigues

Baumann

2010

Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Some studies report that variability increases when reinforcement frequencies decrease (Boren, Moerschbaecher, & Whyte, 1978;Tatham, Wanchisen, & Hineline, 1993;Tremont, 1984), but others report small or no effects (Blough, 1966;Eckerman & Lanson, 1969;Herrnstein, 1961;Machado, 1989). Grunow and Neuringer (2002, Experiment 1) independently manipulated variability contingencies and reinforcement frequencies, and their results may help to explain the previous inconsistencies.…”

Section: Contingencies and Frequencies Of Reinforcementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Operant variability: Evidence, functions, and theory

Neuringer

2002

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

221

217

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although responses are sometimes easy to predict, at other times responding seems highly variable, unpredictable, or even random. The inability to predict is generally attributed to ignorance of controlling variables, but this article is a review of research showing that the highest levels of behavioral variability may result from identifiable reinforcers contingent on such variability. That is, variability is an operant. Discriminative stimuli and reinforcers control it, resulting in low or high variability, depending on the contingencies. Schedule-of-reinforcement effects are orderly, and choosing to vary or repeat is lawfully governed by relative reinforcement frequencies. The operant nature of variability has important implications. For example, learning, exploring, creating, and problem solving may partly depend on it. Abnormal levels of variability, including those found in psychopathologies such as autism, depression, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, may be modified through reinforcement. Operant variability may also help to explain some of the unique attributes of voluntary action.

show abstract

Effects of Fixed and Variable Ratios on Human Behavioral Variability

Cited by 33 publications

References 16 publications

Schedule-Induced and Operant Mechanisms that Influence Response Variability: A Review and Implications for Future Investigations

Schedule-Induced and Operant Mechanisms that Influence Response Variability: A Review and Implications for Future Investigations

History effects on induced and operant variability

Operant variability: Evidence, functions, and theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About